Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Ravindra Dattatraya Dahiwal

DRT8 Nov 2023OA/16/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This tribunal allowed an application under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, for recovery of dues against borrowers who defaulted on term and home loans. The applicant bank secured the outstanding principal with a registered mortgage over the respondents' immovable property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; defendants directed to pay Rs. 47,47,490/- jointly/severally and Rs. 15,10,757/- from mortgaged property with interest.

Bank of Baroda versus Ravindra Dattatraya Dahiwal — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

Presented on: 30/08/2021 Registered on: 25/02/2022 Decided on: 08/11/2023 Duration: Yr Mts. Ds 02 02 09

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AT AURANGABAD

¶4

Original Application No. 16 of 2022 Total claim amount – Rs. 62,58,247/-

¶5

Bank of Baroda, A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head Office at Mandvi, Baroda, State of Gujarat and one of its Branch, namely, Stressed Assets Recovery branch at Regional Office, CIDCO, Aurangabad03 through its Attorney and Chief Manager Mr Vishal Raj Gupta.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1 Mr Ravindra Dattatraya Dahiwal, age 42 years occupation business R/o house No. H.I.G. – 69, Mahada Colony, opposite Dhoot Hospital, Sector N-2, CIDCO, Aurangabad – 431003 Mob. No. 8788560865 email: [email protected]

¶9

2 Mrs Alka Ravindra Dahiwal age 41 years occupation household R/o Tenament No. 151, M.I.G., Mahada Colony, Mukundwadi, Aurangabad – 431007 Mo. No. 8788560865, email: [email protected]

…Defendants

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 1 of 11

[PJM]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant For Defendants No. 1 & 2

¶16

Mr. Sameer J. Pande, Adv. None

¶17

Shri Vimal Gupta Presiding Officer

¶18

JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 8^th November 2023

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

This is an application under sub-section (1) of section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (‘The 1993 Act’ for short) for recovery of the dues in the sum of Rs. 62,58,247/- (Rs. sixty two lakhs fifty eight thousand two hundred forty seven only) together with future interest thereon from the date of filing the application till repayment/ realization.

¶21

The facts of the case are as under:

¶22

Defendant No.1 approached the applicant bank in October 2018 seeking financial assistance for purchase of vehicle – car. Considering the feasibility of the loan proposal with his request, the applicant bank sanctioned the him loan of Rs.

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 2 of 11

[PJM]

14,00,000/- on 15/10/2018 in the nature of term loan, subject to terms and conditions mentioned in the sanction letter dated 15/10/2018 and execution of relevant documents. Defendant No.1 agreed to repay the loan amount with floating interest @ 9.80% per annum with monthly rests, by 84 equated monthly installments of Rs. 22,383/- , each, plus interest and first installment was to be paid on or before 15/11/2018. Deft. No.1 in token of acceptance of terms and conditions laid down in sanction letter dated 15/10/2018 signed on it

¶27

Applicant-bank further pleads that on 15/10/2018 defendant No.1 as borrower has executed and signed the security documents to secure the term loan of Rs. 14.00 lakhs, i.e. Demand promissory note promising to repay the loan amount of Rs. 14.00 lakhs with interest thereon, as agreed, as above, on demand, instrument of hypothecation of vehicle thereby hypothecating the vehicle purchased in favour of applicant and accepting repayment schedule, Declaration cum Undertaking cum Authority, letter of authority to make payment directly to the dealer, letter of installment with acceleration clause. Applicant bank pleads that Deft. No.1 has availed the said full

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 3 of 11

[PJM]

loan facility so granted accordingly and purchased the vehicle car.

¶32

Applicant further pleads that thereafter Deft.No.1 alongwith deft. No.2, who is his wife, again approached to the applicant for taking over home loan, showing willingness to execute mortgage of their immovable property. On giving consideration to the said loan proposal, applicant-bank pleased to sanction home loan of Rs. 42,72,000/- to both the defendants on 17/01/2019, subject to execution of relevant documents and acceptance of terms and conditions. Defts. No.1 & 2 as borrowers agreed to repay the loan amount with interest thereon @ 8.65% p.a. in 300 equated monthly installment of Rs. 34,832/- , each, Defts. also agreed to pay additional 2% penal interest in case of failure to deposit the installments as agreed. Defts. No.1 & 2 in token of acceptance of terms and conditions have signed on the sanction letter dated 17/01/2019.

¶33

It is pleaded that in pursuance of sanction of home loan of Rs. 42,72,000/-, defendants No.1 & 2 have executed following documents to secure the said loan amount on 14/02/2019:

¶34

(A) Memorandum of Entry (mortgage of individual’s

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 4 of 11

[PJM]

property) with particulars of immovable mortgaged property) depositing title deeds at Sr.Nos. (1) to (5) mentioned therein in respect of all the peace and parcel of tenement No. 151 admeasuring 75.00 sq.mtrs, situated at M.I.G. Mahada colony, Mukundwadi, Aurangabad, owned and possessed by Deft. No.1, bounded by : to the East – 6 Mtrs wide road, towards West – Tenement No. .I.. 158, towards the North – Tenement No. M.I.G. 150 and to the South – tenement No. M.I.G. 152.

¶39

(B) Letter of confirmation of mortgage;

¶40

¶41

(D) Loan agreement for individuals (housing loan) on 25/01/2019 for the sum of Rs. 42,72,000/-

¶42

(E) Declaration cum undertakings cum authority on 25/01/2019 by both the defts; and

¶43

(F) Letter of installment with acceleration clause agreeing repayment schedule in 300 equated monthly instalments of Rs. 34,833/-, each and in case of default in repayment, charging of addl. penal 2% interest. Thus, after execution of aforesaid security documents, Defts. No.1 & 2 availed the full home loan

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 5 of 11

[PJM]

facility by withdrawing the loan amount from applicant bank, as shown ledger extract.

¶48

Applicant further pleads that Deft. No.1 has already availed a temporary credit loan limit of Rs. 70,500/- in the year 2019 from applicant bank, except above mentioned two loan facilities.

¶49

It is pleaded that however, after availing all the above three loan facilities, the defendants did not maintain the financial discipline-repayment programme and failed to pay the installments. Despite the assurances and promises of the defendants to regularize the loan account, the defendants did not pay the dues of the applicant bank, whereby the dues in the loan accounts kept increasing gradually and interest kept mounting. The defaults committed by the defendants were long and persistent. Therefore, the account of the defendants classified as NPA.

¶50

Since the defendants failed and neglected to make the repayment, the applicant bank decided to terminate the loan facilities of the defendants and hence the applicant bank demanded payment from the defendants time and again and,

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 6 of 11

[PJM]

lastly, issued legal demand notice on 26/07/2021 calling upon the defendants to liquidate the entire outstanding of all three loan accounts plus interest and other charges. However, defendants did not pay any heed to it and failed to repay the loan amount.

¶55

At the foot of the accounts, (I) amount of Rs. 14,12,490.58 ps. of car loan, (II) Rs. 98,266.18 ps. of loan limit of Rs. 70,500/and (III) Rs. 47,47,490.47 ps. of home loan, making total Rs. 62,58,247/- as on 23/07/2021 was owing, due and payable by defendants to the applicant bank. The applicant bank has maintained the loan ledger extracts and the entries posted therein are made in the usual and ordinary course of banking business which is supported by the certificate as required under law. Since the defendants failed and neglected to make the payment, the applicant was left with no other alternate but to file the original application which was presented on 30/08/2021. Thus, the applicant bank prayed to allow the application and recovery certificate of Rs. 47,47,490/- against Defts. No.1 & 2 and of Rs. 15,10,757/- against Deft. No.1 plus further interest thereon.

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 7 of 11

[PJM]

Though the defendants duly served with the summons, did not

¶60

appear in the matter and therefore, the application proceeded ex parte against them and their right to file written statement stands closed, vide order dated 02/05/2023. Hence, defendants have failed to show cause as to why reliefs prayed for should not be granted.

¶61

The applicant bank filed claim affidavit (Exhibit-4) of Mr. Vishal Raj Gupta, Chief Manager along with list (Exh.5) of original documents to corroborate and prove its claim as given in the Original Application thereby adducing in evidence -the original documents at Sr.No. AW-1 to AW-24 which are admitted in evidence, read, recorded and exhibited.

¶62

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant bank. I have scrutinized and examined the allegations made in the Original Application and analyzed the evidence adduced by the applicant which has gone unchallenged, uncontroverted and unrebutted.

¶63

Based on the pleadings, claim affidavit, original documents, oral submissions by the learned counsel of the applicant bank, the applicant bank has tried to corroborate and prove its claim

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 8 of 11

[PJM]

as mentioned in the Original Application. On going through the documents on record, the application is well within limitation.

¶68

The applicant-bank has made out the case of creation of charge over the property-house, described in paragraph No. 5.8 of Original Application,

¶69

Upon careful scrutiny and examination of Original Application, analyzing the evidence and giving due weightage to the documentary evidence adduced by applicant, which has gone unchallenged due to absence of all the defendants in the matter, I am of the view that there is no reason to disbelieve the claim made by applicant bank.

¶70

In view of the observations made hereinabove, the Original Application filed by the applicant-bank deserves to be granted. Further, due to Covid Pandemic-19, I have to grant reasonable interest. Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶71

O R D E R

¶72

(A) Original Application No. 16 of 2022 is allowed with costs.

¶73

(B) Defendants No. 1 & 2 are ordered and directed to

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 9 of 11

[PJM]

pay to the applicant-bank either jointly or severally the aggregate sum of Rs. 47,47,490/- (Rs. forty seven lakhs forty seven thousand four hundred ninety only) with pendent lite and future interest @ 8% per annum simple from the date of filing the application till payment/realisation.

¶78

(C) Defendants No. 1 is ordered and directed to pay to the applicant-bank the aggregate sum of Rs. 15,10,757/- (Rs. fifteen lakhs ten thousand seven hundred fifty seven only) with pendent lite and future interest @ 8% per annum simple from the date of filing the application till payment/realisation.

¶79

(D) The aforesaid adjudicated amounts are secured by the valid and subsisting Registered Simple Mortgage Deed in respect of house/tenement No. 151 admeasuring 75.00 sq.mtrs, situated at M.I.G. Mahada colony, Mukundwadi, Aurangabad, owned and possessed by Deft. No.1, bounded by :

¶80

to the East – 6 Mtrs wide road, towards West – Tenement No. .I.. 158, towards the North – Tenement No. M.I.G. 150 and to the South – tenement No. M.I.G. 152.

¶81

i.e. all the parts and parcels of the Above property

(OA No. 16 /2022)

Page 10 of 11

[PJM]

along with all furniture, fixtures and things attached therewith,

¶86

(E) The above property be attached and sold in execution.

¶87

(F) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶88

(G) The Registrar is directed to send copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶89

The judgment be uploaded on the official website.

¶90

(Vimal Gupta) PRESIDING OFFICER, Aurangabad, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, Date: 08/11/2023 Aurangabad

¶91

(OA No. 16 /2022)

¶92

Page 11 of 11

¶93

[PJM]

Bank of Baroda v. Ravindra Dattatraya Dahiwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ravindra Dattatraya Dahiwal

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

Mrs Nilofar Raheman Shaikh versus Icici Home Finance Company Limited

Bhumi Enterprises versus Godavari Laxmi Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Manoj Narayan Adhane versus Adarsh Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Vinaykumar Rikhabchand Kothari versus The Malkapur Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd.

Manda Dhondiba Barve versus Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited

Union Bank of India versus Gaurav