CANARA BANK vs B H Gowdru on 30 April 2021

FINAL ORDER

The present TA has been filed bY .. APPLICANT .. DEFENDANTS

1. under Section 19 ofthe Recovery ofDebs An

7993, seeking recovery of money of Rs.1,,37,30,71,0/' (Rqpees One C.rore Thirty Seven Lakhs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Ten only) together with cosb, interest, etc.

2. The case of the Applicant Bank is that the Defendant No.1 has approached the Applicant Bank for sanction of MSME Services Loan vide his application dated 30-10-2017. The Applicant Bank considered the said loan application and sanctioned the MSME Services Loan amounting to Rs.1,20,00,000/- to the Defendant No.1 for the purpose of establishing food processing unit and term loan to purchase machinery and other asseE to establish the bakery unit in terms of the loan agreemenB. The Defendant No.2 is guarantor for the loan availed by the Defendant No.1. In order to secure the above loan, the Defendant No.1 executed documenB, viz., Common Hypothecation Agreement, Pro Note, Request for Overdraft facilities, Letter of Undertaking, Memorandum of Deposib of Title Deeds, morefully Guarantee Covering Letteq, Hypotheca described in Schedule'B' etc.

3. Further; Defendanb 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 the accounts regular by paying installments as and when due to the satisfaction of the Applicant Banh as dehiled in the TA by the Applicant Bank.

4. The DefendanB after utilising the said bans have faihd and neglected to make the repayment of the hans due as agreed and DefendanB have not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and condition agreed by the Defendanb. In view of the continued default, the Loan Account was classified as Non-Performing Asset as per RBI guidelines. The Applicant Bank has initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, ZOO2 to bring the Schedub Property for sale to realize the ouBtanding dues. The Applicant Bank has issued Demand Notice dated 07.07.2079 and Possession Notice dated 79.03.2079 to the Defendanb to repay the o for which the Defendanb have not taken any .-rfav oustanding 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 DefendanE are liable to pay a total sum of Rs.1,37,30,710/- (Rupees One Crore Thirty Seven Lakhs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Ten onlyJ.

6. After filing this DefendanB through RPAD Wherein the summons summons were sent to the served to the Defendant No.1. to the Defendant No.2 was returned by the postal authorities with remarks that "lnsufficient Address", 'Address not known" etc. When DefendanB were called out, DefendanB remained absent and placed as ex parte.

7. To prove the case of the Applicant Banh is Chief Manager Sri T.K. Sai Kumar has fihd his affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW1 marked at Ex.A1 and List of Documenb came be TA, and sent rd at Ex.A2 and 14 documents came to be marked a Ex.A3

16.

8. No evidence on behalfofthe DefendanB' g. ArgumenB of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff Applicant Bank heard and perused the records of the case'

10. Folbwing poinb arise for my consideration:

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

2) What Order?

11. For the folbwing reasons, I answer the above-referred poinE in the folhwing manner:

REASONS

72. The Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examinedasAW.l.Hisaffidavitbywayofevidencereiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and his corroborated by the above-referred Ex'A3 to establish the case of the Applicant Bank to affi which cl A1

TA. 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 0A 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 TA. 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 persons and other properties of the Defendants as required under law and also as advised. Applicant Bank shall file latest Memo of amount together with interest, costs etc., culation

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, pronounced by me in the Virtual Court on this the 30th day of APrW (K. RAVINDRAN Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru

ANNEXURES Witness Examined for the Applicant Bank: AW.1 : Sri T.K. Sai Kuma4 Chief Manager of Applicant Bank Li$t of Documents Exhibited for the Applicant Bank: Ex.A-1 , i Affidavit of AW-1 Ex.A-Z : List of Documents Ex.A-3 to A-16 : 14 documents Witness Examined for the Defendant:

- Nil- List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

- NiI-

Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru Unni (K. RAVINDRAN