CORPORATION BANK vs L. KESHARAM on 21 September 2019

**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT

BENGALURU**

Dated this the 21^st day of September 2019

**:Present:

Shri K Ravindran Nair

Hon'ble Presiding Officer

In-charge-DRT-II**

**TA.No.2078/2017

(IN OA.No.1711/2016-DRT-I)**

**BETWEEN**

**CORPORATION BANK,

Branch Office at No.1011,

1^st Block, Chaduranga Road,

Near Andolana Circle,

Mysuru – 570 022.

**Represented by its Branch Manager-

Sri. Devaraja. B.P.****

..... **APPLICANT**

**AND:**

**Sri. L. KESHARAM,

S/o. Sri. Lumba Ramaji,

Aged about 34 years,

Proprietor –

Mathaji Food Industries,

No.C-3, Hebbal Industrial Area,

Mysuru – 570 016.**

..... **DEFENDANT**

**Counsels on record/appeared for:**

Applicant : Sri. V. B. Ravi Shankar.

Defendant : *Ex parte*.

2TA.No.2078/2017

IN OA.1711/2016-DRT-I**FINAL ORDER**

The present Application dated 16.06.2016 came to be registered on the basis of jurisdictional transfer and renumbered as TA.No.2078/2017 under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.12,65,980/- (Rupees twelve lakh, sixty-five thousand, nine hundred and eighty only) from the Defendant together with interest and cost.

2. The case of the applicant bank is that Defendant had approached the applicant bank for financial assistance to purchase a brand new TATA Ace Zip Vehicle and also Cash Credit facility. Considering the request of the defendant, the Applicant Bank has sanctioned (a) Vehicle Loan of Rs.2,30,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 12.02.2014 and (b) Cash Credit Loan of Rs.10,00,000/-, vide Sanction Letter dated 16.07.2014. The Defendant has executed requisite necessary documents in favour of the applicant bank for the above said loans. The defendant has agreed to repay the said loans as per the terms and conditions of the applicant bank. After availing the loans, 3TA.No.2078/2017

the defendant failed to regularize the loan accounts and also failed to pay the installments and did not come forward to repay the balance outstanding. Hence, the OA was filed and now numbered as TA.2078/2017. The applicant bank has produced the documents in favour of its case viz., Applications, Credit Sanction Intimations, Agreement for Term Loans, Letters of Undertaking, Agreement for Hypothecation, Letter of Proprietorship, On Demand Promissory Note, Take Delivery Letter to DPN, Common Deed of Hypothecation of movables, and Certified Accounts Extracts.

3. Further the Defendant has agreed to repay the above loans with variable rate of interest, as applicable from time to time as per the directions of the Head Office/Central Office of the Applicant Bank and penal interest in case of default and keep the account regular by paying installments as and when due to the satisfaction of the Applicant Bank, as detailed in the OA by the Applicant Bank.

4. The Defendant after utilizing the entire loans proceed for the above said purpose, has failed to make the repayments of 4TA.No.2078/2017

the loans due as agreed and he has not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and conditions. The Defendant has become chronic defaulter in the loan accounts and not taken any steps to clear the dues and hence, the recovery process is initiated against the defendant to recover the dues.

5. In the light of these factors, it is contended by the Applicant Bank that, defendant is liable to pay a total sum of Rs.12,65,980/- (Rupees twelve lakh, sixty-five thousand, nine hundred and eighty only).

6. After transfer of the OA, summons sent to the defendant returned with a shara that "addressee left". Thereafter, summons published against the defendant by paper publication in two daily newspapers. Even then, when the defendant was called out, he remained absent and hence, placed *ex-parte*.

7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, it's Manager - Mr. C.S. Venkatesh has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and marked at Ex. A- 5TA.No.2078/2017

1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex.A-2 and 16 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-18.

8. No evidence on behalf of the Defendant.

9. Arguments of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/ applicant bank heard and perused the records of the case.

10. Following points arise for my consideration:

1) Whether Plaintiff/applicant bank proves its case as contended in the plaint/application?

2) What order?

11. For the following reasons, I answer the above referred points in the following manner:

REASONS

12. Mr. C.S. Venkatesh - Manager of the applicant bank came to be examined as AW-1. His affidavit by way of evidence reiterates the facts pleaded in the plaint and his affidavit is also corroborated by the above referred Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-18, which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, in spite of paper publication, the 6TA.No.2078/2017

Defendant has remained absent, hence, it is to be construed that he has admitted the entire case pleaded by the applicant bank as sought in the present TA.

13. Therefore, for these reasons, present TA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the applicant bank.