Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Sidheshwar Prasad Singh

DRT3 Jul 2023OA/317/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte application filed by Bank of Baroda to recover Rs. 27.37 lakhs with interest and costs against a defaulting borrower. The court upheld the bank's claim based on documentary evidence and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued directing recovery of Rs. 27,37,178.93 with interest at 12% p.a. and costs of Rs. 30,000 via sale of mortgaged/hypothecated assets.

Bank of Baroda versus Sidheshwar Prasad Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

OA 317 of20221JI

¶2

DRT,PATNA

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-80002S

¶4

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶5

OA Case No.317 of 2022

¶6

Bank of Baroda, ROSARB, Patliputra, Patna.

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Sri Sidheshwar Prasad Singh, Sio Sadhu Saran Singh, Rio Sahjadpur, P.O. Adarsh Laxmipur, P.S. Barhiya, Town & District, Lakhisarai.: ......... Defendant

¶10

For the Applicant : Shri Anjani Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Defendant : None

¶11

Dated: 03.07.2023

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

1- The Applicant bank has made this application uls 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 20.05.2022 against the defendant to recover its debts from defendant ofRs. 27,37,178.93 as on 16.04.2022 along with Pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 17.04.2022 with costs till realization.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

The applicant bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertaking) Act 1970 having its registered Office at Mandavi ( Baroda ),and amongst others a Branch Office at Lakhisarai as well as recovery Branches to deal with stressed assets including Regional Stressed Assets Recovery Branch (ROSARB), Patliputra, Patna.

¶17

The defendant no. 1 is engaged in business of Transportation. The defendant approached the Bank for financial assistance and has requested for Term loan under CGTSME scheme for the purchase of a Mahindra truck of Rs.22,50,0001- on 30.08.2014. On the request of defendant the loan application was recommended to the competent authority and after scrutinizing the same and after due consideration the applicant bank sanctioned Term loan(hypothecation ) limit of Rs.22,50,0001- dated 30.08.2014. The defendant executed the various documents in favour of the applicant bank.

¶18

All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. After availing the sanctioned credit facilities became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed

V;7

OA 317 of2022[J)

DRT,PATNA

to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 24.02.2016

¶24

The bank sold the hypothecated property /Truck on 17.2.2022vide vehicle registration no. BR01GD8113, Chassis no. MESPFAHBCE6C48903 and Engine no. BA14ZC0250 in public auction in consideration of Rs.5,55,000/-. The vehicle sold in favour of Mr.Chandan Kumar S/o Jagdish Singh. Thus the total liability in the loan account is Rs.27,37,178.93 with Pendent-lite and future interest contractual rate from 17.04.2022 till the realization.

¶25

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.

¶26

Since, the defendant has 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.

¶27

4- D/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993, copies of application & paper book was sent by this Tribunal to the defendant by registered/speed post on 06.07.2022 and summon/notice issued requiring the defendant to show-cause within 30 days of the service of summon/notice as to why relief prayed for, should not be granted.

¶28

On perusal of the case records, it is clear that on 06.07.2022 summon/notice were sent to the defendant, but the defendant has not appeared, hence, the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently, substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendant on 04.11.2022 in "Aaj" newspaper.

¶29

Despite the registered summon/notice and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendant has not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendant to defend his case, but he failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to Proceed ex-parte against the defendant on 10.01.2023.

¶30

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

¶31

SI.No	Description	of	Date of	Amount	Signature of	Ex.!
	Documents		Execution		Executants	Ann.
	Photocopies					No.

OA 317 of2022[J)

DRT,PATNA

1	Loan application	30.08.2014	Rs,22.50 lakhs	Defendant	1
2	Sanction letter	30.08.2014	Rs.22.50 lakh	defendant	2
3	Particulars	...	...	...	3
4	Agreement	30.08.2014	Rs.22.50 lakh	defendant	4
5	Declaration	30.08.2014	Rs.22.50 lakh	defendant	5
6	Power of Attorney	.......	......	defendant	6
7	Motor Policy cum Certificate	.....	.....	...	7
8	Registration Certificate	....	.....	.....	8
9	Policy	....	.....	......	9
10	Attestation Memo	30.08.2014	Rs.22.50 lakh	bank	10
11	Demand Promissory Note	30.8.2014	Rs.22.50 lakh	defendant	11
12	Letter of Installment	30.08.2014	....	defendant	12
13	Notice	30.10.2017	...	bank	13
14	Legal Notice	...	.....	bank	14
15	Statement of account	as on 16.4.2022	Rs.27,37,178.93	bank	15
16	Acknowledgement of debt	22.7.2020	...	defendant	16

¶36

6- Opportunity of hearing has been fully given to both the parties, but despite several opportunities given to defendant, the defendant has not appeared to contest the case, hence, the ex-parte arguments of learned counsel for applicant bank were heard and perused the case record.

¶37

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendant has 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.

¶38

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.

¶39

7- It has been established that defendant is 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 Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within jurisdiction of this tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶40

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 24.02.2016 and defendant also executed the acknowledgement of debt on 22.7.2020 whereas the present application)las been filed on 20.05.2022.

/~~\1\t1

OA 317 of20221JI

DRT,PATNA

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. As such, it is established that present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶46

9- In the affidavit of Shri Animesh Kumar, 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.

¶47

The documents as stated above reveal that the defendant has 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 defendant has executed various loan documents, which strength the case of the applicant bank.

¶48

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.

¶49

10Since, the case was proceeded ex-parte against defendant, all contentions raised and documents produced by plaintiff remained unrebutted and the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant as per law. Defendant has neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor has 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 (18 of 1891) shall applied to certified copy of an entry in a Banker's Books furnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶50

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 facility, documents were executed by the defendant and facility was availed by the defendant as stated in the application.

¶51

12The applicant bank has sought for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,37,178.93 with cost and further interest at the contractual rate from 17.04.2022 till realization.

¶52

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

) //!~ v ..,.

OA 317 of20221J)

DRT,PATNA

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 defendant in terms of documents and as per directives of RBI.

¶59

15None of the defendant 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 defendant has 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 Honorable 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 defendant of Rs.27,37,178.93/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @12% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 20.05.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends ofjustice. ORDER In the result, the application of the applicant bank is, allowed exparte and debt is determined with costs against the defendant. The defendant is hereby, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.27,37,178.93/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @12% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 20.05.2022 ( The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶63

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

¶64

Defendant is 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 /'

~~~\7"Y7

DRT,PATNA

OA 317 of2022(J)

dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993.The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery Certificate before the Registrar/ Sub- registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets.

¶70

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 4.9.2023. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶72

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 03 rd Days of July 2023

¶73

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶74

-'
cv/~ "-?
.: )v/ n '1\ v:
v" rt,./ (/''7 <br>[Kaushalendra Yadav]
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶75

[See Regulation 24( I)]

¶76

OEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PAll\A 2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Punsar (CiPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-HOW2S.

¶77

Rf<COVERY CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 1911)READ WITH SECTION 19m_) OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1993, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

¶78

Re No. 423/2023

¶79

¶80

Case No: OA/317/2022

¶81

In the Matter of:

¶82

(CH- I) BANK OF BARODA REGIONAL STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH ROSARB PATLlPUTRAPATNA 1ST FLOOR SARYUG COMPLEX NEHRU NAGAR PATNA,BIHAR -0

¶83

Applicanus)

¶84

------ Versus -------

¶85

To,

¶86

(CD- 1) SlDHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH.

¶87

SIO Sadhu Saran Singh, Situated at Sahjadpur P.O - Adarsh Laxmipur .P S.- Barhiya, Town and DistrictLakhisarai

¶88

Defcndanus)

¶89

Lakhisarai,BIHAR

¶90

Y Certificate for Rs.. . 1117178.93 1......fuIR...:fu:m!YSeven Lakhs Thirty Sewn Thousands One Hundred Seventy...lligl!!.Aru!.

¶91

Paise Ninety Three OnIY_1

¶92

In terms of final order dated 03/07/2023 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case. it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 2737178.93 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 20105/2022 i.e. date of tiling 1 with effective date of the OA/3l7/2022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full,jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors. hereinafter referred to as:-

¶93

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors..

¶94

The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 14(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993

¶95

Parties are directed to appear before MANOJ KUMAR. Recovery Officer, DEUTS RECOVERY TRIUUNAL PATNA on 04/U,},2023

¶96

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amended from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors.

¶97

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 04i07/2023

¶98

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RFCOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶99

FORM NO. 10

¶100

¶101

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶102

DEBTSRECOVERYTRIBUNALPATNA

¶103

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar

¶104

(GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶105

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE

¶106

MEMO OF COSTS

¶107

RC No. 423/2023

¶108

¶109

Case No: OA/317/2022

¶110

Applicant(s): BANK OF BARODA

¶111

Versus

¶112

Defendant(s): SIDHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH

¶113

¶114

	s(Inc. Publication)
5.	Miscellaneous Charges
	Total Costs: Rs.	30000

Place: PATNA

Date:)1'/07/2023

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶121

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

¶122

¶123

Date of order or proceeding	DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA Order with the Signature of the Court	Office action taken with data
	OA 3170f2022
03.07.2023	Judgment written on separate sheets kept on the case file and pronounced. Certificate of recovery be issued to the ld. Recovery officer for its execution. PreSid~cer
v Of., ~()7.2023	Certificate U/S 19(7& 22) of the DRT Act, 1993 as amended from time to time in the form no. 09 of the Rules and procedures made there under prepared and signed by me for sending it to ld. Recovery Officer for its execution in accordance with law. preSidi~

Bank of Baroda v. Sidheshwar Prasad Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Sidheshwar Prasad Singh

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

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Baba Mini Rice Mill and Others

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Satnam Mini Rice Mill

Canara Bank versus M/s Sambhawa Agro Farms and Other

Hdfc Bank versus M/S New Aneja Brothers

Bank of Baroda versus Sumeet Kumar and others

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Shree Batuknath Udyog and Others