Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Recovery of Rs. 37 Lakhs Allowed, Assets to be Sold if need be: DRT Decides Ex-parte

DRT, decides ex-parte, that a Recovery Certificate is bound to be issued as the applicant bank proved its claim against the defendants.

Recovery of Rs. 37 Lakhs Allowed, Assets to be Sold if need be: DRT Decides Ex-parte
X

The Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) - III, Chennai heard an original application ex-parte and allowed the recovery of Rs.37 Lakhs, even if the defendant needs to sell assets secured. Also Read: Opportunity of Personal Hearing Missed due to SCN Issuance on GST Portal: Madras HC Remands Matter Referring toS.169 Defendant 1, R.M. Enterprises, is a MSME Enterprise registered...


The Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) - III, Chennai heard an original application ex-parte and allowed the recovery of Rs.37 Lakhs, even if the defendant needs to sell assets secured.

Also Read: Opportunity of Personal Hearing Missed due to SCN Issuance on GST Portal: Madras HC Remands Matter Referring toS.169

Defendant 1, R.M. Enterprises, is a MSME Enterprise registered under Udayam Scheme conducting business of trading oil and groceries. Defendant 2 is its Proprietor who had approached the applicant bank, Bank of Baroda, for grant of Working Capital Facilities for the purpose of development of business.

The applicant bank sanctioned the Working Capital Overdue Limit under CGSTMSE Scheme to a tune of INR 35,00,000/- on 25.11.2021. Shortly afterwards, the defendants failed to make payments as per agreed terms of loan agreement. Eventually, the loan account was classified as NPA on 01.06.2022 in accordance with RBI guidelines.

Summons to the Original Application (OA) were returned ‘unclaimed’. OA was taken up on 02.04.2024 after sufficient time, but defendants neither appeared nor were represented.

Also Read: No Fresh Reassessment after 4years when Facts Were Fully Disclosed: ITAT

K.R. Saravanan, Senior Branch Manager of Applicant Bank, filed his affidavit and a list of documents. After examining the documents carefully, the defendants were set ex-parte and concluded that the applicant bank proved its claim against the defendants.

The tribunal, via S.V. Gowarmma, Presiding Officer, DRT-III, held that the OA stands allowed with costs.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

Next Story

Related Stories

All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019