HDFC BANK vs SRI PATIL BASANAGUDA on 23 August 2022

**FINAL ORDER**

1. 1. The present OA has been filed by the Applicant Bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, seeking recovery of money of Rs.22,26,764/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Four Only) together with costs, interest, etc.

3TA.No.49/2020

2. The case of the Applicant Bank is that the Defendants being the Guarantors have approached the Applicant Bank for grant of Cash Credit Loan and Term Loan facilities. The Applicant Bank considered the request and sanctioned Cash Credit Loan of Rs.10,25,000/-, Term Loan of Rs.2,05,000/- on 13.03.2015 and further in the year 2017 Term Loan been enhanced to Rs.12,45,000/-, on 2015 Cash Credit Loan of Rs.4,05,000/- and the said Cash Credit facility been enhanced to Rs.7,00,000/- on 18.01.2017, in terms of the loan agreements. In order to secure the loans, the Defendants have executed documents, viz., Sanction Letter, Agreement for Overdraft/Cash Credit cum Guarantee, Agreement for Term Loan cum Guarantee cum Hypothecation, Mortgage Deed, Supplemental Agreement, Agreement for dropline overdraft cum Hypothecation cum Guarantee, Account Statement, Foreclosure and Statement of Account etc.

3. Further, the Defendants have 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 4TA.No.49/2020

the accounts 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 utilising the said loans have failed and neglected to make the repayment of the loans due as agreed and Defendants have not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and condition agreed by the Defendants. In view of the continued default, the loan accounts were classified as Non-Performing Asset. The Applicant Bank has sent Legal Notice on 05.01.2021 to the Defendants. In spite of receipt of Legal Notice, the Defendants have failed to pay the outstanding dues and hence the recovery process is initiated 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 total sum of Rs.22,26,764/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Four Only).

6. After filing this OA, Summons were sent and served to Defendants No.1, 2, 4 & 5 through RPAD. Summons sent to 5TA.No.49/2020

Defendant No.3 remained unserved & returned with postal remarks "Refuse" hence service held sufficient. When Defendants were called out, Defendants remained absent and placed as ex-parte.

1. 7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Deputy Manager, Sri Anantha B, has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked at Ex.A1 and List of Documents came to be marked at Ex.A2 and 28 documents came to be marked at Ex.A3 to 30

2. 8. No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.

3. 9. Arguments of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff / Applicant Bank heard and perused the records of the case.

4. 10. Following points arise for my consideration:

1. 1) Whether Plaintiff / Applicant Bank proves its case as contended in the plaint / application?

2. 2) What Order?

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

6TA.No.49/2020

REASONS

12. The Deputy Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. His affidavit by way of evidence reiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and his affidavit is also corroborated by the above-referred Ex.A3 to A30 which clearly establish the case of the Applicant Bank to allow the present OA. Added to this, the Defendants have remained absent, hence it is to be construed that Defendants have admitted the entire case pleaded by the Applicant Bank in the present OA.

13. Therefore, for these reasons, present OA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the Applicant Bank.

ORDER

Present OA stands allowed as prayed for with interest and costs.

In the event of failure of the Defendants to pay the said OA amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to sell the Schedule properties in accordance with law as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA.

7TA.No.49/2020

In spite of sale of the schedule properties, if the OA amount is not fully realised, then the Applicant Bank is at liberty to proceed against the person and other property of the Defendants in accordance with law.

Applicant Bank shall file latest Memo of Calculation of OA 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 realised by sale of assets, etc., during the intervening period after filing the OA, 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 as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA and do the needful as required under the law forthwith.

8

TA.No.49/2020

The Office is directed to issue, as far as possible, free copy of this order to the parties concerned.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 23^rd day of August, 2022)

(IMTIAZ ALI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, Bengaluru

**ANNEXURES**

**Witness Examined for the Applicant Bank:**

AW-1 : Sri Anantha B. Deputy Manager of Applicant Bank

**List of Documents Exhibited for the Applicant Bank:**

Ex.A-1 : Affidavit of AW-1 Ex.A-2 : List of Documents Ex.A-3 to A-30 : 28 documents

**Witness Examined for the Defendants:**

- Nil -

**List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:**

- Nil -

23.8.22 (IMTIAZ ALI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, Bengaluru

VS