Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Ghuman Traders

DRT20 Oct 2023OA/408/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of loan dues along with interest. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate allowing sale of mortgaged and hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.38,23,199.97p with interest at 18% per annum from 17.01.2022; issuance of Recovery Certificate; instruction to Recovery Officer to distribute sale proceeds.

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Ghuman Traders — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 408 of 2022 Date of Institution: 19.01.2022 Date of Decision: 20.10.2023

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd. one of its branch at 362-363, Shakti Mall, Lajpat Nagar, Gymkhana Club, Jalandhar, Punjab-144001.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

¶7

1. M/s Ghuman Traders, a sole proprietorship firm situated at Dana Mandi, VPO Nadala District Kapurthala, through its Sole Proprietor Sh. Manjit Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh.

¶8

1. Sh. Manjit Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o House No.44, Village Mirjapur, District Kapurthala -144003.

¶9

1. Sh. Narinderjeet Singh S/o Sh. Kulwant Singh, R/o VPO Ibrahimwal District Kapurthala 144033. ……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Sumit Batra, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- Ex parte. OA for the Recovery of Rs.38,23,199.97p with interest @18% per annum with monthly rests from 17.01.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

HDFC Bank Ltd. (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.38,23,199.97p with interest against M/s Ghuman Traders And Others (defendants).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 10.09.2013, it had granted ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 lacs to defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 for business purpose. Defendant nos.2 and 3 stood as guarantors. To secure the loan, Defendant no.2 had mortgaged his immovable property and also created hypothecation of stocks and other moveable assets (fully

¶15

¶16

detailed in para No.3(A) of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.20% per annum with monthly rests. At the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 had executed the renewal of the credit facility vide sanction letters dated 18.07.2014, 29.07.2015, 16.11.2016, 16.09.2017 and 24.07.2018. On 16.01.2022, a sum of Rs.38,23,199.97p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

On 10.03.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 07.12.2022, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶18

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Sunil Kalra, Authorized Representative along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-26.

¶19

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.25.00 lacs and on 17.01.2022, a sum of Rs.38,23,199.97p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.38,23,199.97p (Rupees Thirty-Eight Lacs Twenty-Three Thousand One Hundred Ninety-Nine And Paisa Ninety Seven Only) with interest @18% per annum with monthly rests from 17.01.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged immovable property and hypothecation of stocks and other moveable assets (fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application) as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶20

¶21

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 22.11.2023 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and hypothecated assets, as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 20^th October, 2023 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Ghuman Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Ghuman 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

Ummer T a versus South Indian Bank

Bank of India versus M/s Rupjyoti Gas

Uco Bank versus M/s Z S Business

Govind Khangawal versus Hdb Financial Services Ltd.

Axis Bank versus Jai Narain Goel

Ramesh Kaumar Aggarwal versus Indian Bank