Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs gudusab varakala on 30 April 2021
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 30<sup>th</sup> day of April, 2021
**Present: Shri. K. Ravindran Nair**
Hon'ble Presiding Officer
**T.A. No.4/2020**
**BETWEEN:**
**State Bank of India**
Assets Recovery Management Branch
2nd Floor, BKG Complex
Mysore Bank Campus, Avenue Road
Bangalore-560009
(Represented by its Chief Manager
Smt Jeeva K)
** .. APPLICANT**
**AND:**
**1. Sri Gudusab Varakala**
S/o Sri Rajasab
R/at. Vyasanakere Village
Hospet Taluk
Bellary District-583 222
**2. Sri Hanumanthappa**
S/o. Sri Ramappa
R/at. Vyasanakere Village
Hospet Taluk
Bellary District-583 222
** .. DEFENDANT**
**Counsels on record/appeared for:**
Applicant : Sri N.G. Ravi Kumar
Defendants : Ex parte
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.
**FINAL ORDER**
1. The present TA has been filed by the Applicant Bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 3TA.No.4/2020
TA by the Applicant Bank. On the request of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank rephased the loan account as requested by the Defendants from time to time.
4. The Defendants after utilising the said loan and rephased loan have failed and neglected to make the repayment of the loan dues 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 Account was classified as Non-Performing Asset. The Applicant Bank issued Legal Notice dated 13.03.2020 to the Defendants to repay the outstanding balance for which the Defendants did not take any steps to repay the outstanding due amount 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.22,17,252/- (Twenty Two Lakh Seventeen Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Two only).
6. After filing this TA, summons was sent and served to 4TA.No.4/2020
the Defendants through RPAD. When Defendants were called out, Defendants remained absent and placed as ex parte.
7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Chief Manager Smt. Jeeva K has filed her 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 10 documents came to be marked at Ex.A3 to 12.
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:
1. 1) Whether Plaintiff / Applicant Bank proves its case as contended in the plaint / application?
2. 2) What Order?
11. For the following reasons, I answer the above-referred points in the following manner:
5TA.No.4/2020**REASONS**
12. The Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. Her affidavit by way of evidence reiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and her affidavit is also corroborated by the above-referred Ex.A3 to A12 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 Defendants had 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 TA 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.
6TA.No.4/2020
In spite of sale of the Schedule properties, if the TA amount is not fully realised, 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 latest 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 realised 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 as sought by the Applicant Bank in the TA and do the needful as required under the law forthwith.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Virtual Court on this the 30<sup>th</sup> day of April, 2021)
**(K. RAVINDRAN NAIR)** Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru
7TA.No.4/2020**ANNEXURES****Witness Examined for the Applicant Bank:**
AW-1 : Smt. Jeeva K Chief 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-12 : 10 documents
**Witness Examined for the Defendants:**
- Nil -
**List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:**
- Nil -
30/4/2021.
**(K. RAVINDRAN NAIR)** Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru
SG