Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Vishal Traders

DRT15 Nov 2023OA/36/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues and future interest from M/s. Vishal Traders. The tribunal held the demand herein is due to the default in payment by the Respondent and confirmed recovery against the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to pay Rs. 29,65,457/- with interest and costs; applicant granted permission to proceed against all properties and issue Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Vishal Traders — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on:	18/10/2021
Registered on:	15/03/2022
Decided on:	15/11/2023
Duration:	Y. M. D.
	2 – 0 - 27

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, at Aurangabad

¶3

Original Application No. 36 of 2022

¶4

Total claim amount – Rs. 29,65,457/-

¶5

Union Bank of India, (a Government of India Undertaking) having its Central office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai – 400 021 and amongst other branches, one of the Branch at CTS No. 3292, Sukh Niketan, Timber Market, Opp. Sarvodaya Chatralaya, Bhusawal Tal. Bhusawal District Jalgaon through its Authorized Officer Jitendra Kumar Sahu, age 36 years occup. service, Authorized Officer of Union Bank of India, Branch at CTS No. 3292, Sukh Niketan, Timber Market, Op. Sarvodaya Chatralaya, Bhusawal Tal. Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

(Madkar) (O.A. No. 36/2022)

Page 1 of 6

Versus

M/s. Vishal Traders,

through its Proprietor Shri Ashok Deochand Patil, age major occup. business R/o Plot No. 42, Gat No. 203/3B, Shriramnagar, Vanjola Road, Bhusawal Tal. Bhusawal Dist. Jalgaon - 425201

…Defendant

Appearance :

For Applicant-bank

For Defendant

Mr. Atul A. Mishra, Adv.

¶17

Absent

¶18

Shri Vimal Gupta, Presiding Officer

¶19

Pronounced on : 15^th November 2023

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This is an application under sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of the dues in the sum of Rs. 29,65,457/- (Rs. twenty nine lakhs sixty five thousand four hundred fifty seven only) together with future interest @ 13% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing Orig. Application till repayment/ realization.

¶22

Applicant-bank, in short, pleads that defendant obtained

¶23

(Madkar) (O.A. No. 36/2022)

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

Term Loan/SOD Loan of Rs. 24.00 lakhs under the Mortgage Scheme on 22/09/2015 for business purpose, on execution of relevant documents in favour of applicant bank including Regd. Mortgage Deed, vide No. 483 dated 19/12/2018 before the SubRegistrar, Bhusawal, for the property shown in para No. 5.5 of the Orig. Application and on acceptance of terms and conditions as to repayment. The defendant agreed to repay the loan amount alongwith interest @ 12.75% p.a.,, with monthly rests, by 144 EMIs of Rs. 32620/-, each, from October 2015. Applicant bank pleads that however, the defendant failed to repay the loan amount as agreed and therefore, the loan account converted into NPA on 01/06/2019, and consequently, the applicant issued demand notice on 15/09/2021 to which the defendant didn’t pay any response and failed to repay the loan amount. Hence this Orig. Application.

¶26

Defendant though served with summons, he remained absent and therefore, the Orig. Application proceeded ex parte against him, vide order dated 24/04/2023.

¶27

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶28

(Madkar) (O.A. No. 36/2022)

¶29

Page 3 of 6

¶30

The point that arises for consideration is, whether the applicant-bank is entitled for the claim made in the Orig. Application against the defendant, as prayed for ?

¶31

I have gone through the record of the matter. The applicant bank has filed Claim Affidavit of Mr Jitendra Kumar Sahu at Exh. 4. The applicant bank also filed list of original documents annexing therewith 9 documents to corroborate and prove its claim, as given in the Original Application, which are marked as Exh.A.W.1 to A.W. 9 on behalf of the applicant, which clinches the claim of the applicant-bank against the defendant. Moreover, in view of the fact that the averments in the Original Application have gone unrebutted because of absence of the defendant in the matter, the Tribunal is of the opinion that the applicant-bank is entitled for the prayers made therein. Further more, perusal of the documents on record shows that the Orig. Application is filed well within the period of limitation of three years as he has deposited some meagre amounts in the loan accounts in the year 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. Hence I hold that the defendant is liable to pay to applicant-bank the claimed amount in Orig. Application with

¶32

(Madkar) (O.A. No. 36/2022)

¶33

Page 4 of 6

¶34

future reasonable interest considering meantime Covid-Pandeic19 long period and costs. Hence the following order.

¶35

O R D E R

¶36

(A) Orig. Appln. No. 36 of 2022 is allowed with costs.

¶37

(B) Defendant is directed to pay to the applicant-bank the aggregate sum of Rs. 29,65,457/- (Rs. twenty nine lakhs sixty five thousand four hundred fifty seven only) with pendente lite and future interest @ 8 (eight)% per annum, simple, from the date of filing Orig. Appln. till payment/ realisation.

¶38

(C) Amount recovered, if any, by applicant-bank during pendency of the Orig. Appln. shall be reduced from such calculated amount before the Recovery Officer and demand notice shall be issued for balance amount.

¶39

(D) The applicant-bank is entitled to proceed against the and as

¶40

mortgaged hypothecated properties, described in the Orig. Application towards realization of the dues of the defendant.

¶41

(E) The applicant-bank is entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

(Madkar) (O.A. No. 36/2022)

¶43

Page 5 of 6

¶44

(F) The applicant bank is entitled to the costs of the Original Application.

¶45

(G) The applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶46

(H) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶47

(I) The applicant bank to file affidavit before the Recovery Officer about sale of property and appropriation of money in the loan account under the securitization, if any, before issuance of Demand Notice.

¶48

(J) Copy of order be sent to the Recovery Officer.

¶49

(K) Communicate order to the parties concerned.

¶50

Order be uploaded on the official website.

¶51

( Vimal Gupta ) PRESIDING OFFICER, Aurangabad, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, Date: 15^th Nov. 2023 Aurangabad

¶52

Uploaded on official website on 10/04/2024

¶53

(Madkar) (O.A. No. 36/2022)

¶54

Page 6 of 6

Union Bank of India v. M/S Vishal Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Vishal Traders

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

Indu Publication versus Asrec India Limited

Raghoji Vishvnath Pundge versus Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

Mr Ashok Bhagwat Ingole versus Poornawadi Nagrik Sahakari Bank

Renuka Prakash Kore versus Bank of Maharashtra

Union Bank of India versus Rekha

Kisanlal Giriraj Sharma versus Fullerton Inida Home finance Co. Ltd.