Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/s Divyanshu Poultry Farm and Others

DRT4 Feb 2023OA/167/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna allowed an ex-parte application by Punjab National Bank for recovery of Rs. 78,28,889 along with future interest @9.50% p.a. from the proprietors and guarantors after finding no defense filed against the prima facie documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Debt recovered jointly and severally to the tune of Rs. 78,28,889/- with future interest @9.50% p.a. with monthly rests from 21.2.2022 till realization.

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Divyanshu Poultry Farm… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2023)

¶1

OA 167 of20221JJ

¶2

DRT,PATNA

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road at PATNA-800025

¶4

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶5

OA Case no. : 167 of 2022

¶6

Punjab National Bank, Branch Office Hazipur, Vaishali,DistrictVaishali.

¶7

. Applicant -Bank

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Divyanshu Poultry Farm thorugh its proprietor Smt. Nisha Kumari W/o Devanand Patel,Rlo Village Karampura, P.O. Jadua, Hazipur, District-Vaishali, Pin 844101.

¶10

Smt. Nisha Kumari W/o Devanand Patel Rio Village- Karampura P.O.-Jadua, Hazipur,District-Vaishali, Pin-844101 PAN no. EHXPK9959J.

¶11

Ramanand Patel S/o Sri Brahamdeo Prasad Rio Village Karampura, P.O.-Jadua, Hazipur, District-Vaishali, Pin-844101. PAN no. BNIPPI514J.

¶12

Brahamdeo Prasad S/o Late Beni Prasad Rio Village Karampura, P.O.-Jadua, Hazipur, District-Vaishali, Pin-844101.

¶13

Devanand Patel S/o Sri Brahamdeo Prasad Rio Village Karampura, P.O.-Jadua, Hazipur, District-Vaishali, Pin-844101

¶14

...Defendants.

¶15

Present:

¶16

For the Applicant : Shri Anurag Kumar proxy counsel for Shri Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Defendants None

¶17

Dated: 04.02.2023

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

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 21.2.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.78,28,889/- upto 20.2.2022 alongwith pendente-lite and future interest at the rate of contractual from 21.2.2022 with costs till realization.

¶20

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

DRT,PATNA

OA 167 of 2022 [J]

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

¶25

The applicant bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 and having its Head Office at Plot no. 4 sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-l10075 and inter alia a Branch Office Hazipur, Vaishali, District-Vaishali..

¶26

The defendant no. 1 is a proprietorship firm and defendant no. 2 is proprietor and defendant no. 3 to 5 are guarantors. The defendant no. 1 approached and applied for the term loan limit ofRs. 39.72 lakh and cash credit limit of Rs.19.95 lakh for the poultry business to the applicant bank. The applicant bank sanctioned cash credit Rs.19.95 lakh and term loan of Rs.39.72 lakh on 3.5.2016. The defendants executed the various loan documents i.e. term loan agreement, hypothecation agreement and agreement of guarantee. The defendant no. 3 to 5 created registered mortgage details given at page 7 ofOA ..

¶27

The defendant thereafter enjoyed the benefit of said loan facility but after some time did not adhere to the terms and conditions of the said facility and despite repeated request did not clear dues within specified time as per the agreements of the facility and later on due to non- deposit of the installments by defendant his account become irregular despite regular follow up by telephone and recall notice. As a result the account of defendant had classified as NPA on 31.3.2021 as per guidelines of RBI.

¶28

The outstanding dues amount comes to Rs.78,28,889/and the defendants are liable to pay further interest on the said amount w.e.f. 21.2.2022.

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

DRT,PATNA

OA 1670(2022 [J]

Despite the registered summons/notices, which is evident from the tracking report and the sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 18.7.2022.

¶36

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

¶37

SI.No	Description of Documents	Date of Execution	Amount	Signature of executant	Ex.! Ann. No.
1	Loan application	....	TL Rs.39.72Iakh CC Rs.l9.95 lakh	defendant no. 1&2	1
2	Sanction letter	...	TL Rs.39.72Iakh CC Rs.19.95 lakh	bank	2
3	Hypothecation agreement	....	'"	defendant no. 2	3
4	Guarantee agreement	3.5.2016	TL Rs.39.72Iakh andCC	defendants	4
5	copy of deed	'"	...	...	5
6	Balance and security confirmation letter	28.3.2019	...	defendant no. 2	6
7	Statement of account	as on 20.2.2022	Rs.78,28,889/-	bank	7

¶38

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.

¶39

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants 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.

¶40

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.

¶41

7- It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on his 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

~\J

DRT,PATNA

OA 167 of 2022 [J]

Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within jurisdiction of this tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has .tcrritorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶47

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 21.2.2022. 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 from the date of declaring the account as NPA. As such, it is established that present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶48

9- In the affidavit of Shri Satyendra Kumar Jha, 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.

¶49

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.

¶50

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. .

¶51

10Since, the defendants were proceeded exparte, 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 (I8 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.

DRT,PATNA

OA 1670(2022 [J)

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 and facilities was availed by the defendants as stated in the application.

¶56

12The applicant bank has sought for recovery of a sum of Rs.78,28,889/- with cost and further interest at the contractual rate with monthly rests from 21.2.2022 till realization.

¶57

13Learned Advocate appearing for applicant bank submits that the applicant 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.

¶58

14On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the pleadings, documents and affidavit, it is proved that the applicant has charged interest against defendants in terms of documents and as per directives of RBI.

¶59

15None of the defendants appeared before the tribunal to contest the claim made by the applicant, therefore, it necessarily goes to establish 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.

¶60

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-

¶61

"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."

¶62

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 defendantsjointly and severally ofRs.78,28,889/- alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @9.50% p.a. with monthly rests from

DRT,PATNA

OA 1670(2022 [J]

21.2.2022(The date of filing of this O.A.) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶67

ORDER

¶68

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is, allowed ex-parte and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants jointly and severally are hereby, ordered to pay the applicant bank it's debts amounting to Rs.78,28,889/alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @9.50% p.a. with monthly rests from 21.2.2022 (The date of filing of this O.A.) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶69

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

¶70

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any other. properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendant, by sale of mortgaged! hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendant.

¶71

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 24.3.2023. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶72

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court ~ on this 04th Day of February, 2023.

¶73

~ "'-\ ~ rVl 1- [Kaushalendra Yadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶74

Dictated & corrected by me.

Punjab National Bank v. M/s Divyanshu Poultry Farm and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/s Divyanshu Poultry Farm 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S. Shivaji Poly Containers

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Kisan Traders and others

State Bank of India versus Abhinandan Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Chinta Devi & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Chandel versus State Bank of India

The South Indian Bank Ltd. versus Ms Varadhi Advertisers Pvt. Ltd.