Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Roopvsant

DRT8 Feb 2023OA/140/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues. The court found defendants jointly liable, granted interest, ordered sale of mortgaged and personal assets, and directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 22,08,817.35 with 8.25% simple pendentelite and future interest; assets restrained; Recovery Certificate issued under Section 19(2).

Union Bank of India versus Roopvsant — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'ble Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶4

Original Application No. - 140122

¶5

Union Bank of lndia, Vitlage-Sihora, Post-Mandi Bamora, Tehsil-Kurwai, Distt.-Vidisha (M.P.)

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shri Roopvsant, S/o Shri Heera Lal Kushwaha

¶9

Shri Bundet Singh, S/o Shri Heera Lat Kushwaha

¶10

(Both R/o Vittasge-Bitakhedi, Post-Bandrawtha, Tehsil-Kurwai, District-Vidisha, M. P. )

¶11

..,., Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Shri M.D.N. Bajpai, Advocate

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Dated : 08h February,2O23l

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 28101122 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 22,08,817.35 (Rupees Twenty One Lac, Eight Thousand, Eight Hundred Seventeen and Paisa Thirty Five only) atong with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1, the Appticant Bank had Renewed Union Green Card facitity of Rs. 5 Lac on 24/091'13 which was subsequentty enhanced upto Rs. 20 Lac on 31/03/18. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facility, the Defendant No.1 as borrower and Defendant No.-2 as guarantor in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have a[so created mortgage over the immovable property, i.e., Khasra No.-1611, 178t1, 17Bt?.,204, VittageBeelakhedi, Tehsi[-Kurwai, Distt.-Sihora Vidisha, area 6.825 hectare; betonging to Defendant No.-1. The Defendant No.-1 availed the credit facitity and also executed Balance Confirmation Letter on 1OlO31ZO. The account became irregular and the Defendants faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of various letters and Legal Notice on

¶18

)

¶19

oAt40l22

¶20

29107 121 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has relied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-45 which were proved by Shri Rajkumar Suryawanshi, Branch Manager.

¶21

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19109122, There is therefore, no reason to disbelieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointty and severatly tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its application has ctaimed interest @8.25% p.a. with monthty rests. However, I feet it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @08.25% p.a. simpte pendentelite and future till reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶22

The Original Apptication is atlowed and it is ordered as under-

¶23

i) The Defendants do pay^jointty and severatty Rs. 22,08,817.35 (Rupees Twenty One Lac, Eight Thousand, Eight Hundred Seventeen and Paisa Thirty Five onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @08.25%^per annum simple from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,28101122, with costs titt its realization.

¶24

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitled to selt the mortgaged as wetl as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way dealing^with their properties/assets without first^paying the claim of the^{AppticantBank.}

¶25

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(221 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank may file a^memo of^cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶26

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this Day of^{08th February, 2023.}

¶27

o>? 7 2'. (Ram Niwas atet) Presidine Officer

Union Bank of India v. Roopvsant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Roopvsant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Singrauli Embroidery and Garments

Ms Sparkling Sun Realestate Indore Pvt. Ltd. versus Tata Capital Financial Services Limited

Ms Tushar Irrigation versus Canara Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Sahid Khan

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Narendra Kumar Tiwari

Lokendra Singh versus Aspire Home Finance Corporation Ltd.