Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anil Kumar

DRT7 Jun 2023OA/1643/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an ex-parte original application filed by State Bank of India against a borrower for recovery of Rs. 23.68 lacs. While recognizing the bank's claim supported by documentary evidence, the Tribunal reduced the interest rate to a uniform simple interest of 8% per annum from the filing date pending realization.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 23,68,129/- with 8% per annum interest from 12.09.2022; liberty to recover via sale of mortgaged, hypothecated, or personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Anil Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1643/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.09.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 7^th DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶5

State Bank of India , a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having its Corporate Office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17-A, Chandigarh, having Branches all over India and one of its Branches at Ahar, Tehsil Israna, District Panipat, through its Branch Manager and Principal Officer Sh. Ashwani Kumar Sharma

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Balbir Singh R/o Village and Post Office Ludana, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind, Haryana

¶9

…..Defendant

¶10

Argued by: Sh. Divjot Singh Rekhi, Nodal Officer for the applicant bank Defendant ex parte vide order dated 02.02.2023

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendant for recovery of Rs.23,68,129/- (Rupees Twenty Three lacs Sixty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Nine Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Ashwani Kumar Sharma, Branch Manager of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application.

¶13

OA/1643/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ANIL KUMAR

¶14

¶15

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for grant of KCC facility of Rs.18.94 lacs vide loan application dated 24.06.2013, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶16

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid credit facility to the defendant vide letter of arrangement dated 26.06.2013, AnnexureA2 (copy) as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶17

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendant executed hypothecation agreement dated 01.07.2013, Annexure-A3 (copy).

¶18

The aforesaid loan was further secured by creation of registered mortgage by the defendant in respect of agricultural land measuring 13 Kanals 1 Marla situated in the revenue estate of Morkhi, Tehsil Pillu-Khera, District Jind, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5.7 of the Original Application.

¶19

The documents relating to the mortgage are as under:

¶20

i. Registered mortgage deed dated 26.06.2013, AnnexureA4 (copy)

¶21

ii. Request letter dated 29.06.2013 to the Tehsildar, PilluKhera, for entry/mutation of mortgaged property, Annexure-A5 (copy).

¶22

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendant but he failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan account became irregular and it was declared as NPA on 01.09.2020.

¶23

OA/1643/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ANIL KUMAR

¶24

¶25

The defendant executed revival letters dated 26.04.2016 and 20.04.2019, Annexures-A6 and A7 (copy). The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 12.08.2022 along with postal receipt, Annexure-A8 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶26

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.23,68,129/- (Rupees Twenty Three lacs Sixty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Nine Only) is recoverable against the defendant as per statement of account, Annexure-A9 (copy) duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act.

¶27

Since the defendant did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.

¶28

Notice of the Original Application was duly served upon the defendant, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendant, thus, the defendant was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 02.02.2023 .

¶29

In support of the contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Ashwani Kumar Sharma, Branch Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶30

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by Sh. Divjot Singh Rekhi, Nodal Officer of the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶31

It was argued by Sh. Divjot Singh Rekhi, Nodal Officer that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the

¶32

OA/1643/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ANIL KUMAR

¶33

¶34

applicant bank had proved its case against the defendant for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A9 , it is clear that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. It is further clear that the defendant had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,68,129/- (Rupees Twenty Three lacs Sixty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Nine Only) from the defendant.

¶35

In so far as pendent lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed rate of interest @10.60% per annum with half yearly rests. In letter of arrangement dated 26.06.2013, Annexure-A2 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @7% up to Rs. 3 lacs and @13.70% per annum for rest of the amount.

¶36

This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogatives of mercy and magnanimity are the brightest jewels in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including the Pandemic Covid-19 affecting businesses, nature of the mortgaged property, purpose of loan, i.e. agricultural, present conditions of economy based on agriculture, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems

¶37

OA/1643/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs ANIL KUMAR

¶38

¶39

it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶40

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.23,68,129/- (Rupees Twenty Three lacs Sixty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Nine Only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 12.09.2022 , till

¶41

the date of realisation of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property of the defendant in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 or otherwise. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶42

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶43

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 07.08.2023.

¶44

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendant through registered/speed post. This order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶45

Announced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anil Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anil Kumar

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

M/S Ramdeo Traders Proprietor Uday Subhaschandra Bothra versus Icici Bank Limited

Smt Kokila Wo Gajananrao Shete versus Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Babita Rani

Mustaaq Ahmad Seikh versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Sh. Kushi Ram

State Bank of India versus Sh. Shamsher Singh