Partly allowed

Central Bank of India v. Sh. Raja Ram

DRT10 May 2023OA/320/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chandigarh allowed an application for recovery of dues plus interest against the primary borrower who mortgaged land as security, but rejected recovery against the guarantor, finding the application against the guarantor time-barred.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed against defendant No.1 (mortgagor); application dismissed against defendant No.2 (guarantor) as time-barred. Recovery certificate issued against the mortgaged land.

Central Bank of India versus Sh. Raja Ram — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL.I, CHANDIGARH}

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG,^{PRESIDINGOFFICER}

¶3

OA No: 32012022

¶4

Date of Institution : 01.01.2022 Date of Decision: 10.05.2023

¶5

Central Bank of [ndia,^one of^{its branch at CircularRoad AboharTehsil} Abohar District Fazilka.

¶6

........Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

l. Sh. Raja Ram S/o Sh. Pema^{Ram S/o Sh. Ladhu RamR"/o village} Maujgarh Tehsil Abohar District Fazilka.

¶9

Sh. Radhey Sham S/o Sh. Raja Ram^{S/o Sh. Pema Ram R/o} Village Mauigarh Tehsil Abohar District^Fazilka.

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Sh. Sumit Batra, proxy Counsel for Sh. Anil^{PardeepKataria, Counsel} for the applicant bank.

¶13

Defendants - ex parte

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.28,29,,5821- with^interest @12.70o/o^{per annum with half yearly rests from} 26.1t.202t.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

l. Central Bank of India, (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy^Act.1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.28,29.5821- with interest againsl Sh. Raja Ram and another^{(defendants).}

¶17

Bank's case is that on 04.01 .2016, it had^granted a loan^of Rs.38,73,000/- to defendant No.l and 2 under^{Poly l{ouselJnit Term} Loan lacility'. Det'endant No.2 had also stood^{guarantor. T'o secure the} loan, Defendant No.l had mortgaged his land measuring^{36K -l9M} situated at Village Maujgarh Tehsil Abohar District^{Fazilka (fully} detailed in para No.5.4 of the application). I'he^{loan was chargeable to} interest^(@12.70o/o per annum with half^yearly rests. On 26.11.2021,^a

¶18

¶19

I sum of Rs.28,29,5821was due from the defendants.^{Despiterepeated} requests, defendants did not make the^{repayment. Hence,this} application.

¶20

On 08.03.2022, summonses^{were sent to the defendants by} registered post, which were duly served.^{However,defendantsdid not} put in appearance. Vide order dated 25.07^{.2022, they were proceededex} parte,

¶21

In order to prove its case, the Bank has^{placedon record the} affidavit of Ms, Mani Mittal, Chiel'Manager^{along with the loan and} security documents and marked them as Exhibit^{A-1 to A-15.} 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of^{the considered} view that the Bank has proved its case that it^{had advanced the loan of} Rs.38,73,000/- and on26.11.2021, a sum of^{Rs.28,29,5821-was due.} 5(a) The loan was given by the bank in the^{year 2016 andthe present} OA was filed in the year 2022. Accordingly. the OA^{againstdefendant} No.2 is time-barred. Since detbndant No.l had created^{the mortgage,the} OA against defendant No.1 on the basis of creation of^{mortgage is within} time.

¶22

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the^recoveryof Rs.28,29,582/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Twenty^{Nine ThousandFive} Hundred and Eighty Two Only) with interest @12.70oh^{per annum with} half yearly rests lrom 26.11.2021, till the date of^{paymentis hereby} allowed with costs against defendant No.l^{only. Bank can recoverits} dues by the sale of mortgaged land measuring^{36K -19M situated at} Village Maujgarh T'ehsil Abohar District Fazilka fully detailed^{in para} No.5.4 of the application only. 7. Pending IAs, if any. stand disposed of.

¶23

¶24

Recovery Certificate be^{issuedaccordingly.} g. Parties are directed to appear^{befbre Recovery Officer on} 10.07.2023, who is directed to^{distribute the sale proceedsof the} mortgage land and standing crops^{as per the provisions of Section 19(20-} AB) of the Act. 10. A Copy of this order along^{with RecoveryCertiticate be sent to} the Recovery Officer as well as the^parties.

¶25

Pronounced in the open court. Dated: 10.05.2023 Pankay

Central Bank of India v. Sh. Raja Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Sh. Raja Ram

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

Punjab National Bank versus Srm India Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Skyla Fashion

Ms Encore Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd. versus Dr. Yashwant Singh

Satender Kumar Tyagi versus Punjab National Bank

Anand Paswan versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Asian Cargo Movers