Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Maa Janki Agro Pvt. Ltd. and Others

DRT7 Dec 2022OA/243/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 RDB Act filed by Punjab National Bank to recover dues of Rs 24,44,643 jointly and severally against a private company and its directors after proceeding ex parte against non-appearance of respondents.

What did the court decide?

Order to recover Rs. 24,44,643 along with interest and costs jointly and severally against defendants no. 1 & 2, and issuance of recovery certificate.

Punjab National Bank versus Maa Janki Agro Pvt… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2022)

¶1

OA 243 of2022 [JI

¶2

DRT, PATNA

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶4

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Roadat PATNA-800025

¶5

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶6

OA Case no. : 243 of 2022

¶7

Punjab National Bank, Lakhaura, District-East Champaran.

¶8

. ....... Apphcant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Maa Janki Agro Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office actINBhelwa Chhauradano, District-East Champaran, Pin 845302. no. U15400BR2013PTC021437, PAN no. AAJCM0129J.

¶11

Shyam Sunder Prasad S/o Sri Rajendra Prasad Rio Village-Bheh:a Balirama, P.O. + P.S.-Chhauradano, District-East Champaran, Pm 845302. PAN no. CBWPP7000A.

¶12

Smt. Savita Devi Wlo Sri Shyam Sunder Prasad, Rio Village Bhelwa Balirama, P.O. + P.S.-Chhauradano, District-East Champaran, Pin 845302, PAN no. BRVPD64(}6N.

¶13

...Defendants.

¶14

Present:

¶15

For the Applicant : Shri Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Defendants : None

¶16

Dated: 07.12.2022

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

1- The Applicant bank has made this application U/S 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 24.3.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.24,44,643/- as on 23.3.2022 alongwith pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 24.3.2022with costs till realization.

¶19

2- The application has been duly registered and numbered as above.

¶20

3- The brief facts of the case of the applicant bank as stated in the application are as under-

¶21

The applicant bank body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Corporate Office Plot no. 4,Sector-10,Dwarka New Delhi-110075 and having one of its SASTRA Office at Circle Office Motihari, District East Champaran inter alia carrying on business among other places also at Branch Office at Lakhaura, District-East Champaran.

¶22

The defendant no. 1 is a private limited company and defendant n~. 2 & 3 are director of defendant no. 1. The defendant no. 1 through its DIrectors approached the bank and submitted a proposal for cash credit loan of Rs. 19 lakh on behalf of defendant no. 1 being their respective

OA 243 of 2022 [J)

DRT,PATNA

capacities as the authorized directors of the defendant no. 1 company and persons responsible for day to day affairs of the defendant no. 1 company. It is relevant here to mention that the defendant no. 1 company through its directors defendant no. 2 executed the various loan documents. The bank sanctioned cash credit limit Rs.19lakh on 27.12.2017. The defendant no. 1 in order the secure the credit facilities further offered its property details given at page 14in schedule -I of GA.

¶27

All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. After availing the sanctioned credit facilities became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 31.3.2021.

¶28

Thus the total liability in the loan account is Rs.24,44,643/-with pendentelite and future interest @12% p.a. compounded with monthly rests from 24.3.2022 till the realization.

¶29

The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶30

Since, the defendants have failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶31

4- D/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993, copies of application & paper book was sent by this Tribunal to the defendants by registered/speed post on 14.5.2022, and summons/notices issued requiring the defendants to show-cause within 30 days of the service of summons/notices as to why relief prayed for, should not be granted.

¶32

Despite the registered summons/notices, the defendants have appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants 4.8.2022.

¶33

5- To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit of Shri Shailendra Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows. :-

¶34

SI.No 1	Description photocopies Documents Incorporation certificate	of	Date of Execution ... / U~	Amount ...	Signature of executants ...	Ex.! Ann. No. 1

OA 243 of 2022 [J)

DRT,PATNA

2	Loan application	27.12.2017	Rs.19lakh	defendants	2
3	Sanction letter	27.12.2017	Rs.19lakh	bank	3
4	agreement of hypothecation	27.12.2017	Rs.19lakh	defendant no. 1&2	4
5	deed	...	...	...	5
6	balance and security confirmation letter	17.12.2020	...	defendant no. 1&2	6
7	Statement of account	as on 23.3.2022	Rs.24,44,643/-	bank	7

¶39

6- Opportunity of hearing has been fully given to both the parties, but despite several opportunities given to defendants, the defendants have not appeared to contest the case, hence, the ex-parte arguments of learned counsel for applicant bank were heard and perused the case record.

¶40

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants no. 1 & 2 have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence.

¶41

It is further submitted by ld. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no any stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, inOA.

¶42

7- It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within jurisdiction of this tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecumary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶43

8- On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 31.3.2021, whereas the present application has been filed on 24.3.2022. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶44

9- In the affidavit of Shri Shailendra Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, has stated that he is well acquainted with the facts of the case and has on verification of record, sworn in the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and established on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶45

The documents as stated above reveal that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, which strength the case of the applicant bank. C\ / D;7\,/'

OA 243 of 2022 (J]

DRT,PATNA

On perusal of the loan documents, it appears that to secure the loan facility, the defendant no.1 & 2 have executed various loan documents, but the defendant no.3 has not executed any loan documents or the guarantee deed.

¶50

So far as requesting to pass the decree, against the defendant no. 3 also, but the applicant bank has not filed any loan documents, executed by the defendant no. 3, therefore, the defendant no. 3 is not liable to pay the due amount.

¶51

The applicant bank has also furnished statement of account as above, which is not only admissible but shall be taken as correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account has not been challenged.

¶52

10Since, the case was proceeded ex-parte against defendants, all contentions raised and documents produced by plaintiff remained unrebutted and the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant as per law. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account, which is kept in due course of business, evidence on affidavit, which has supported the claim of the applicant bank, established to have fully correct and believable. Provisions contained in Rule 9(2) of Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993 provide that the documents referred in the application shall be duly stated by senior officer of the bank, or financial institution as the case may be and numbered accordingly. The rule 12 (10) provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker's Books evidence that Act, 1891 (18 of 1891) shall applied to certified copy of an entry in a Banker's Books furnished alongwith application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶53

11On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the application, documents and affidavit, it is proved that the applicant bank has granted the loan facilities, documents were executed by the defendants no. 1 & 2and facilities were availed by the defendants no. I & 2as stated in the application.

¶54

12The applicant bank has sought for recovery of a sum of Rs.24,44,643/- with cost and further interest at the contractual rate from 24.3.2022 till realization.

¶55

13Learned Advocate appearing for applicant bank submits that the ~pplicant bank has charged interest in terms of the agreements and that interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶56

14On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the pleadings documents and affidavit, it is proved that the applicant has charged %rv/

¶57

¶58

OA 243 of 2022 IJ)

¶59

DRT,PATNA

¶60

interest against defendants in terms of documents and as per directives of RBI.

¶61

15None of the defendants appeared before the tribunal to contest the claim made by the applicant, therefore, it necessarily goes to establis.h that the claim made by the applicant bank is genuine and true. It IS manifest that the defendants have not disputed the claim, therefore, the claim referred to the tribunal is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶62

16In Indian Bank Vs. Blue Jaggers Estates Limited and others [2010] 8 SCC 129,the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has observed as under-

¶63

"The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the bank is a trustee of public fund. It cannot compromise the public interest for benefiting private individuals. Those who take loan and avail financial facilities from the bank are duty bound to repay the amount strictly in accordance with the terms of the contract. Any lapse in such matters has to be viewed seriously and the bank is not only entitled but duty bound to recover the amount by adopting all legally permissible methods. Parliament enacted the act because it was found that legal mechanism available till then was wholly insufficient for recovery of the outstanding dues of the banks and Financial Institutions."

¶64

17In my view, Facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank ex-parte. Accordingly, The applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants no. 1 & 2 jointly and severally ofRs.24,44,643/- alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @ 12% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 24.3.2022(The date of filing of this O.A.) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends ofjustice.

¶65

ORDER

¶66

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is, allowed exparte and debt is determined with costs against the defendants no. 1 & 2. The defendants no. 1 & 2 is hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank it's debts amounting to Rs.24,44,643/-alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @ 12% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 24.3.2022 (The date of filing of this O.A.)till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶67

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶68

Deendants no. ~ & 2 are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbenng or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothcate~ 0: any other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice.

¶69

. Let .a certificate of eoverybe.drawn up forthwith and put up for sIgaturesm terms ofrovIslOnscontained in Section 19(22)of the Act to be Issued, on the baSISof the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery {I./

OA 243 of 2022[J)

DRT,PATNA

Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants no. 1 & 2, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants no. 1 & 2.

¶74

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 27.1.2023. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶75

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on this 071h Day of December, 2022. ~ /

¶76

~ /
/} \ \rv<br>I-
[Kaushalendra Yadav]
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶77

Dictated & corrected by me.

Punjab National Bank v. Maa Janki Agro Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Maa Janki Agro Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus Mr Ubed Ullah Shareef

Ms Bhagwati Traders through its Proprietor Vinod Tikamdas Bagdi versus Fullerton India Credit Company Limited

Big v Teleco Private Limited Thorugh Its Representive Shri Ashwin Mangalal Paigwar versus Piramal Capital

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Maa Tara Traders and Others

Uvaice P H versus Axis Bank

State Bank of India versus Sri Bhanu Prakash Pallapu