Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs BELA NAIK @ BHILLA NAYAK on 21 December 2019
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 21<sup>st</sup> day of December, 2019
**Present: Shri K Ravindran Nair
Hon'ble Presiding Officer
Incharge-DRT-II**
**T.A.No.7/2019**
**(O.A.No.445/2019-DRT-I)**
**BETWEEN:**
**State Bank of India**
Asset Recovery Management Branch
II floor, BKG Complex building
Avenue Road, Bengaluru-560 009
**Represented by its Chief Manager**
**Sri A.Suresh**
S/o Sri Arunachalam
** ...APPLICANT**
**AND:**
**1) Mr.Bela Naik @ Bhilla Nayak**
S/o Sri Lakshma Naik
**2) Mrs. Shanta Bai**
W/o Sri Bela Naik @ Bhilla Nayak
**both are r/at:** Sangapura Village
Gangavathi Taluk
Koppal District
** ....DEFENDANTS**
**Counsels on record/appeared for:**
**Applicant : Sri R.N.S.P.Achanta**
**D1 & D2 : Ex-parte**
**FINAL ORDERS**
The present Application came to be registered on 04.01.2019 on the basis of jurisdictional transfer and renumbered as Transfer Application No.7/2019 under Section 19 of the
Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.22,30,974/- (Rupees twenty-two lakh thirty thousand nine hundred and seventy-four only) from the Defendants together with interest and cost.
2. The case of the applicant bank is that defendants had approached the applicant bank seeking financial assistance for agricultural operations. The applicant bank considered their request and sanctioned term loan of Rs.4.94 Lakhs vide sanction letter dated 05.01.2007 and term loan of Rs.3.29 Lakh vide sanction letter dated 11.04.2012. Defendants have executed necessary documents in favour of the applicant bank. After availing the loan, the defendants failed to regularize the loan account and also failed to pay the installments, they did not come forward to repay the balance outstanding. The Applicant bank has issued demandletter dated 17.10.2016 to the defendants, for which the defendants have not taken any steps to clear the dues. Hence, the O.A was filed and now numbered as TA.7 of 2019. The applicant bank has produced the documents in favour of its case viz., loan application, letter of sanction,
hypothecation agreement, registered mortgage deed, request letter, revival letters, certified copy of account extract etc.
3. Further the defendants agreed to repay the above loan with variable rates 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 to 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 defendants after utilizing the entire loan proceeds for the above said purpose have failed to make the repayments of the loan dues as agreed, not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and conditions agreed by them and became chronic defaulters and hence, the recovery process is initiated against the defendants to recover the dues.
5. In the light of these factors, it is contended by the Applicant Bank that, Defendants are liable to pay a sum of Rs.22,30,974/- A handwritten signature in blue ink, consisting of a large, stylized loop or 'A' shape, is located at the bottom right of the page, partially overlapping the text of paragraph 5.
(Rupees twenty-two lakh thirty thousand nine hundred and seventy-four only) .
6. After filing the OA, summons were sent through RPAD and same were served on the defendants, when defendants were called out, they remained absent and hence, were placed ex parte.
7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Chief Manager, Mr. G.Sundaresh, S/o Late Govinda Raj V, has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and marked at Ex. A-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex.A-2 and 13 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-15.
8. No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.
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:
- a) Whether Plaintiff/applicant bank proves its case as contended in the plaint/application?
- b) What order?
11. For the following reasons, I answer the above referred points in the following manner:
**REASONS**
12. Mr. G.Sundaresh, S/o Late Govinda Raj V, Chief 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-15 which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, the defendants remained absent, hence it is to be construed that the defendants have 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.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
**:O R D E R:**
Present TA stands allowed with costs.
Defendants shall be jointly and severally are liable to pay Rs.22,30,974/- (Rupees twenty-two lakh thirty thousand nine hundred and seventy-four only) with interest at the rate of 14.85% p.a. with half yearly rests, from the date of application till the date of final realization, as sought by the Applicant Bank in the TA.
In the event of failure of Defendants to pay the said TA amount, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the mortgaged immovable properties as described in the Schedule-A of the main petition in accordance with law as sought by the applicant bank in the TA.
In spite of sale of the properties mentioned in the Schedule/s, if the TA amount is not fully realized, then the Applicant Bank is at liberty to proceed against the person and other properties of the Defendants as required under law and also as advised.
Applicant Bank shall file fresh Memo of calculation of TA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by Defendants duly taking into account the amount/s if any paid by the Defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets, etc., during the intervening period after filing the TA, to enable the office to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by the Defendants to the Applicant Bank.
Office is directed to issue Recovery Certificate.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the **21<sup>st</sup> day of December, 2019**)
**(K. Ravindran Nair)** **Presiding Officer** **I/c -DRT II, Bengaluru**
8T.A.7/2019 in O.A.No.445/2019**ANNEXURES:****LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT-BANK:**
AW.1 – Mr. G.Sundaresh, S/o Late Govinda Raj V Chief Manager of Applicant bank
**LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT BANK:**
Ex.A1 : Affidavit of AW.1 Ex.A2 : List of documents Exs.A3 – A.15 : 13 documents
**LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS :**
- NIL -
**LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS:**
-NIL-
**(K Ravindran Nair)**
Presiding Officer I/c-DRT-II, Bengaluru
s\*