Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Shree Samarth Stone Crusher

DRT7 Nov 2023OA/148/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Punjab National Bank to recover a term loan of Rs. 19,27,091.50 with interest and penal charges from the defaulting borrower, sanctioned the recovery certificate, and directed an injunction on the defendant's assets pending recovery.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 19,27,091.50 with interest and penal charges within 60 days; Recovery Certificate issued; assets restrained.

Punjab National Bank versus Shree Samarth Stone Crusher — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

OA 148 of 2022

Registered on:

13.04.2022

Decided on: 07.11.2023

¶5

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT MUMBAI ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 148 of 2022

¶6

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, A Bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Under-takings) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at 7, Bhikhaiji Cama Place, New Delhi- 110 607 and also having one of its Branch Office at Bandra (W), Mumbai- 400 015 and another Asset Recovery Management Branch Office at PNB- Pragati Tower, 1^st Floor, Plot No. C- 9, G-Block, Bandra Office at- PNB Pragati Tower, 1^st Floor, Plot No. C-9, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra

¶7

…. APPLICANT

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

SANA NOORMOHAMD SHAIKH, An adult Indian inhabitant having address at, Flat No. 101, ‘B’ Wing, Jagganth Dham Building, Nandivali Pada, Dombivali (East), Thane 421201 and Noormohamd Shaikh, Khadi Machine Sultana Palace, Mumbra 400612

¶10

… DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Advocate John Daniel Counsel for the Defendant : Ex-parte

¶12

J U D G M E N T

¶13

The Original Application has been filed by the Applicant against the Defendant for recovery of Rs. 19,27,091.50 (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Ninety One and Paise Fifty) with further interest thereon at the rate of 12.50% per annum

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

OA 148 of 2022

¶16

(compounding) with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% (simple) from the date of the application till payment or realization.

¶17

Facts as succinctly set out in the present OA are that the Defendant approached the Applicant Bank along with an application for a Term Laon facility for Defendant’s business purpose. Pursuant to the request, Applicant on 20.11.2009 granted term loan facility of Rs. 23,67,400.

¶18

In consideration of sanction of term loan facility Defendant executed term loan agreement documents on 20.11.2009 in favour of the Applicant. It is further stated that Defendant by executing balance and security confirmation letter dated 07.06.2011, 13.12.2012, 22.05.2014 & 28.11.2014 confirmed and acknowledged his liability.

¶19

However, after availing term loan facility, Defendant failed and neglected to pay the dues of the said facility, thus the account of Defendant was declared as NPA on 30.06.2011. Thereafter, the Applicant through their Advocates issued recall notice dated 18.09.2017 and called upon the Defendant to pay the outstandings dues. Hence, the present OA was filed.

¶20

Notice was issued to the Defendant. Despite service, none appeared for the Defendant nor filed the WS thus, Defendant was proceeded ex-parte vide even order.

¶21

The Applicant Bank has produced all the Original Loan documents and other relevant documents along with their Claim Affidavit filed on through Manager Mahesh G. Kagathara.

¶22

I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the record.

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

OA 148 of 2022

¶25

The witness of the Applicant Bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the OA, even otherwise the whole case of the Applicant Bank is based on documents and the witness has duly proved all these documents as against the defendant. In my view there is no question of disbelieving the evidence led by the Applicant Bank and the Applicant Bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

¶26

In the light of above discussions, the Original Application filed by the Applicant Bank deserves to be allowed against the Defendant.

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

(i) I allow the present O.A. and direct the Defendant, to pay to the Applicant, within a period of 60 days, a sum of Rs. 19,27,091.50 (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Ninety One and Paise Fifty) with further interest thereon at the rate of 12.50% per annum (compounding) with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% (simple) from the date of the application till payment or realization.

¶29

(ii) Failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of the immoveable assets and other personal moveable of the Defendant.

¶30

(iii) Defendant is hereby directed not to deal with their properties till further direction of Ld. Recovery Officer.

¶31

(iv) Defendant shall also pay the cost and expenses of the OA.

¶32

Page 3 of 4

¶33

OA 148 of 2022

¶34

(v) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer of this Tribunal.

¶35

Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record.

¶36

Place: Mumbai. Date : 07.11.2023

¶37

(Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar) Presiding Officer,

¶38

DRT-1, Mumbai.

¶39

Tjs/-

¶40

Page 4 of 4

Punjab National Bank v. Shree Samarth Stone Crusher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Shree Samarth Stone Crusher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Sky One Corporate Park LLP versus Catalyst Trusteeship Limited

Jm Finance Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd. versus Ms Nitco Ltd.

Tata Communication Limited versus Doha Bank Qsc and Iridium India Telecom Limited

Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited versus Bhumiraj Builders Private Limited

Life Insurance Corporation of India versus Essel Infraprojects Limited

Royal Trinity Maritime Enterprises versus Indian Bank