Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Ms Joyram Bricks Industry

DRT23 Jun 2023OA/295/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by Punjab National Bank for issuance of a Recovery Certificate under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act, 1993, against defaulting borrowers and a guarantor based on unchallenged documentary evidence and mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 1,07,26,324.00 with pending interest and costs against the respondents.

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Joyram Bricks Industry — DRT (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

o"^" z€5rn)22/oRTcuhh.t,

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, GUWAHATI

¶4

(North Easlem Region)

¶5

(Tribunal ofAs8am, Nagaland, Meghglaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh & Tripu.a)

¶6

Beforo Shdshiy SharanDubev. Pr$idlno Ofiicel

¶7

O.A. No. 29512022

¶8

ln the matter of -

¶9

Puniab N.tional Bank (Ei3tvvhile United B.nk of lndia, Choumuhani Branch, Motor Stand Road, Agartala, Tripura West-79900'1.

¶10

"Appricant

¶11

v3.

¶12

lrrr Joyram Bdcks lndusty M.B.C.Nagar, Chittamara, Belonia, Tripura South, Pin-7ggl55

¶13

Srl iranik Lal Da8 2) S/o Kanai Lal Das

¶14

Ward No.1, Ram Thakur Para, Near Ram Thakur Seva Mandir,

¶15

Belonia, Pin-799155, Dist ct-Tripura South.

¶16

Smt Laksht Saha Das @ Laxmi Saha Das W/o Manik Lal Das

¶17

Ward No.1, Ram Thakur^para, Near Ram Thakur Seva Mandir, Belonia, Pin-7991SS, Oistrict-Tripura South.

¶18

Defenda nts

¶19

Presence of the Counsel :

¶20

For the Applicant Bank : Mr Akhtar^parvez, Mr. Sanjit Singha, Mr. Dipanka Gogoi, Mr. Bidup Roy, Advocates

¶21

For the Defendants : Mr. Subham Das,

¶22

Mr. Kangkan Deka, Advocates (Right to file WS cum EA already closed)

¶23

Dated :23106/2023

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

This is an apprication under section i9 of the Recovery of Debts Due lo Banks and Financial lnstitutions Act,^.1993 filed by the punjab National Bank (Erstwhite United Bank of lndia), Choumuhani Branch, Motor Stand Road, Agartala, Tripura

¶26

St,,^q.4/4- )L"r ,^"".nl* l'3 d DRT. Guwahati

¶27

O A 295/2022lDRT€0ahan

¶28

West-799001, with a prayer to issue Recovery Certificate for the sum of

¶29

Rs.1,07,26,324.00 (Rupees One Cror€ Sevon Laca Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Four) only as on 30-06-2022 against the defendants with pendentelite and future interest at contractual rate till realization along with cost and other reliei

¶30

A few facts giving rise to the present application are as under.

¶31

The Defendant No.l M/s Joyram Bricks lndustry is a proprietorshap concern of defendant No.2. The defendant No.l had availed credit facilities from the applicant bank and the defendant No.3 stood guarantor to the loan availed by the defendant No.1.

¶32

On request of the defendant No.z being proprietor of defendant No.1, the applicant bank had sanctioned a sum of Rs.80.00 Lacs only to the defendanls as Cash Credit Limit vide Sanction lefter dated 10]12-2013. As per the Sanction letter the applicable rate of interest for the sanctioned loan was fixed at 12.5% p.a. with monthly rests.

¶33

ln order to avail the sanctioned Cash Credit limit of Rs.80.00 Lacs only, on 10-12-2013 itself the defendant No.2 had executed secu ty documents viz., Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuity, Letter of Lien, Hypothecation Agreement (Goods, Book Debts, Planl & Machineries) interalla agreeing to the terms mentioned therein. The defendanl No.2 further has executed letter dated 10-12-2013 being Declaration on execution of Documents.

¶34

ln order to secure the loan availed by defendant^{No.1,lhe defendantNo.3} had extended her^guarantee by executing Letter of Guarantee^{on 10-'12-2013.}

¶35

Vide letter dated 03-07-2015 lhe^defendant No.2^{had requestedthe} applicant bank for sanction^{of TemporaryOver Draft of Rs.16.00 Lacs only against} the Cash Credit loan account.^{Consideringthe application, the applicant bank had} sanctioned Temporary Over^{Draft (TOD) of Rs.12.00 Lacs only for a period of 60} days vide Sanction letter dated^{08-07-2015. As per lhe sanction lotler,the} applicable rate of interest^{for the sanctionedloan was fixedat 13.15%.}

¶36

SLrls-l.n^{tp- A,l"-l} 2)l(E l2) n Pro.lding Oficel^| 'r DRT, Gur€hali

¶37

¶38

g.A- 295t2022/DRr{usanst

¶39

ln order to avail the sanctioned TOD limit, on 08-07-2015 itself the defendant No.2 being proprietor of defendant No.1 had executed Demand promissory Note for Overall limit of Rs.92.00 Lacs only, Letter of Continuity and Supplemental Hypolhecation Agreement. The defendant No.2 further had executed letter regarding Declaration on execulion of documents dated Og-07-2Ol S.

¶40

On 3r)-'12-20t5 the defendant No.2 being proprietor of defendant No.,l had executed Rovival letter and Barance confirmation letter interalia admitting his debts and liabiliti's towards the appricant bank. since the defendanrs were irregurar in making ropayment of the loan, vide Notice dated 08-03-2016 the applicant bank had asked the defendants to regularize their loan account.

¶41

Vida Sanction letter dated 1S-O2-20IA the applicant bank had reviewed the loan account of the defendants, which has duly been acknowledged by the defendants by putting their signatures on the foot of the Sanction lefter. On i5-02_ 201{l itsell the dofendant No.2 further had executed Demand promissory Note, Revlval Letter, Letter of Lien, Letter of Continuity and Hypothecation Agreement (Goods, Book Debts, Plant & Machineries). The defendant No.3 also had extended her guaranlae by executing Letter of Guarantee dated 15-02-2019. The defendant No.2 also had executed Balance Confirmation letter dated 15-02-2o.lg interalia admitling his debts and liabilities towards the applicant bank.

¶42

ln order to secure the loan availed by the defendant No.l, the defendant No.? Sri Manik Lal Das had created equitable mortgage of his immovable property being " lanrl and building measuring 3715 Sq. ft. (0.086 Acres) situated at Jait Road, P.S Belonia, Dislrict- South Tripura under Mouza & Tahsil- Belonia, covered undsr Khatian No. 148, Plot No. 3903, 3904 & 3905(Hal), 4227(pl, a22B(p\ (Sabek)" (lully described in Schedule-A of the OA) by deposii of title deeds with the applicant bank. ln order to create the mortgage, the defendant No.2 had executed specimen of acknowledgement letter rslating to deposit of title desds interalia depooiling the tille deeds and other relevant documents with the applicant bank. The defendsnt No.2 further had axtended this mortgage by executing letter regarding l:xtension of Equitable Mortgage dated 08-07-2015.

¶43

'**5m,u'r DRT, GLrwahati

¶44

¶45

o.A. 2g5/2ozzoRT€flahari

¶46

ln order to secure lhe loan availed by the defendant No.1, the defendant No.3 Smt Lakshi Saha (Das) had also created equitable mortgage of her immovable property being ',land and building measuring 1512 Sq. fl. (0.030 Acres) situated at Ramthakurpara, p.S. Belonia, Districfsouth Tripura under Mouza & Tahsit Betonia, covered under Khatian No. 4607, plot No. 142110573(Hal),,(fulty described in Schedute-B of the OA) by deposit of tifle deeds with the applicant , bank ln order to create the mortgage, the defendant No.3 had executed specimen of acknowledgement letter relating to deposit of tifle deeds interatia depositing the title deeds and other relevant documents with the applicant bank. The defendant No.3 furthrrr had extended this mortgage by executing letter regarding Extension of Equitabte Mortgage dated OB-07_20.1 5.

¶47

The defendants had avaited the loan facilities from the applicant bank but have not poid the outstanding amount as per terms and condition made with the applicant bank in spitrr of repeated demands and request by the applicanl bank. As the loan ' accounts of defendants were running extremely irregular and due to non-payment of pnncipal amount and interest, the said accounts were classified as a NpA on 29.03.201A. After the accounts became NpA the applicant bank issued notices for repayment of the due amount, the defendants have neither chosen for repayment of the ban anx)unt nor renewed the loan accounts.

¶48

The applicant bank thus became constrained to ,ile the present Original Application for lhe recovery of Rs. 1,07,26,324.00 (Rupses One Crore Sevsn Lacs Twonty Sir Thousand Thrae Hundred Twenty Four) only as on 30_06_2022 along wilh lnterest and cost ofthe application.

¶49

After filing of the OA the Tribunal issued nolices upon the defendants through regisfered post and the applicant bank filed service reporl on 07.11.2022 and brought on rocord the postal receipts along with track consignment report. The learned counsel for defendants No. 1, 2 & 3 appeared on 19.09.2022 by filing vakalatnama. Theroafter the case was listed on several occasions but defendants No 1, 2 & 3 have not filed th()ir written statement cum evidence and hence the right of the defendants to

¶50

Sl,vr-l.a-u. Q--}.r., "*",o,"noiJl4lD ORT. Guurahaii⁽

¶51

¶52

o.A. 2g5po22/DRT-cuwahari

¶53

file the wrilten statement cum evidence on affidavit was closed on 01.02.2023. Ther{)afler the matter was posled for hearing on behalf of the applicant bank.

¶54

Suppo(ing the claim of the applicant bank Mr. Arijit Das, Chief Manager of the Aplllcant Bank has filed evidence on affidavit coupled with the security documents marked a$ l:xhibit AW-1/1 to AW-1/3g,supporting the claim of the applicant bank.

¶55

Hear(l the learned counsel for the applicant bank who prayed for issuance of Re(nvery Cerlilicate against the defendanis as per pleadings made in the Application, supported by evidence on affidavit of their witness who affirmed on oath the cxecutlon of the security and other documents by the defendants and also exo0ution 0f lheir own documents relied upon, which have been marked exhibits.

¶56

None has appeared for the defendanls on the day of argumenl.

¶57

Conaidering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view lhat tho documents filed by the applicant bank are supporting the claim of the apptcanl bsnk a d establishing the liability of the defendants. lt is proved that the defsrdants rrre jorn y and severally liable to pay to the applicant bank the claim made in tho Ori0inal Application. The loans were obtained and documenb have been executed r)n 10.12.2013, 08.07.20i5 & 15.02.2018. The defendant No.2 being proprietor or defondant No.1 had executed Revivar retters & Barance confirmarion letterB daterl 30-12-Z0jS & 15.02.2018. Moreover after perusing the documents on recorr r and taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case. r ,ind that the nrorlgal6r have been created by the defendant No.2 & 3 in respecl of Schedule A & B pror)orties, where the rimitation avairabre is for 12 years and as such taking inlo account of lhrl crearx rn of the mortgage the apprication appears to have been filed wefl within the periorl of lirnitatio[ The account became NpA on 29.03.201g and the OA has been filed on 30 07.2022. Hence, the OA is filed wefi wilhin the period of limitalion and this TribU al havrng a jurisdiction to adjudicate the Original Application.

¶58

Con6idering lhe unrebutted/unchallenged version of Mr. Arrit Das, the applicant's witnass and all the documents marked as exhibits, including duly certified copy of tho slatfrmenl of account along with interest calculation sheet maintained by

¶59

S-l".,irAU,^n i,"r ,,"",0"n'ol?j$l'-1⁴ DRT. Guwahali

¶60

¶61

O A 2glr2o2zDRT-cwahari

¶62

the applicant Bank in it's regular course of business, I hold that the applicant is entitled to get tho Recovery Certificate as prayed for.

¶63

ln the result, the present Original Application No.29S ol 2022 is allowed with cosl as urder:-

¶64

i) Tlrc defsndants No. 1, 2 & 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay lo the aplrrcanl bank a sum of Rs. 1,07,26,324.00 (Rupees One Crore Seven Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Twsnty Four) only with pendentelite an(l fuiure [email protected]% p.a. with monthly rests from 01.07.2022 till the dal€ of full paymenurealization and also cost of lhe application.

¶65

ii) The chaqe of the certilicated amount be kept alive on mortgaged property, i.e. equitoble mortgage of land and building measuring 3715 sq fl (0.086 Acros) situated at Jail Road, P.S. Belonia, Distric! South Tripura under Mouza & Tahsil-Belonia, covered under Khatian No.^'148, Plot No. 3903,3904 & :rtr05 (lial), 4227 (p),4228(p\ (Sabek), which is bounded by North: Land of Banr Das, South: Road; East: Road; West: Nani Gopal Sen, as described in Schrdule-A of the OA till the amount is realized in full.

¶66

iii) Thc charge of the certificated amount be kept alive on morlgaged^property, i.e. equitoble mortgage of land and building measuring 1512 sq ft^(0.035 Acros) sltuated at Ramthakurpara, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura under Mouza & Tahsil-Belonia, covered under Khatian No. 4607, Plot No. 14.1|10573 (Hal), which is bounded by North:^Land of^{Ratan Das; South:} Slra8ti Charan Oas; East: Krishna^{Dey;West: Road as described in Schedule-} B ol the OA till the amount is realized in^full.

¶67

iv) Ttro applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the secured^{ilems towards} recovery of the debts.

¶68

v) Thrl applicant bank is also enlitled to^{proceed againstthe personal assets and} prol)ertie8 ol the defendants towards recovery of the dues.

¶69

vi) Tho applicant bank is entitled to the costs^{of the o.A. whichincludesthe} adv(,cate fees of the^{applicant bank. Applicant is directed to file the cost} monro within 2 weeks from today. Cl.il f{o,,ar f{o,,ar Q..t",

¶70

Cl.il f{o,,ar f{o,,ar Q..t", 27lctl)2 4 Prcsiding Offcei^- DRT. Guwahala

¶71

¶72

oA 2g5/2o22roRi-Guwahan

¶73

vil) lssUr) Recovery Certificate accordingly for a sum Rs.^{.1,07,26,324.00} (Rupees

¶74

Ono Croro Seven Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Four) only in favour of the applicant bank against the defendants No. 1, 2 & 3.

¶75

viii) C(nlmunicate copy of this order to ihe concemed parties.

¶76

Tlrs ordor is dictated and corrected by the undersigned.

¶77

Judltrnent dated 23rd June, 2023, signed and pronounced in the Tribunal loday

¶78

undor my si0natute.

¶79

' Copy of the JudgmenuFinat Order be uptoaded in the Tribunat's Website and fil(' lre corr'igne{l to Record Room.

¶80

tlirsl.a4- 4,,]*l (shi, sh","iDir[TJB /

¶81

Presiding Ofticer DRT, Guwahati.

Punjab National Bank v. Ms Joyram Bricks Industry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Ms Joyram Bricks Industry

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

State Bank of India versus Mr Pura Bareh

Anand Paswan versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Gurunanak Electronics and others

Mustaf Mohiuddin Jeelano Alias M M Jeelani versus South Indian Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Amandeep Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Ahmed Rinku