Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. M/s Jai Maa Durga Industries and Others

DRT6 Dec 2023OA/426/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte order, the DRT allowed HDFC Bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act to recover Rs. 1.37 crore plus interest from the borrower and guarantors. The respondents failed to appear or file a written statement despite notices. The court determined the debt based on bank documents and certified a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued directing recovery of Rs. 1,37,98,295.95 with interest at 18% p.a. jointly and severally from the defendants.

Hdfc Bank versus M/s Jai Maa Durga Industries and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

OA 426 of 2022lJl

¶2

DRT. PATNA

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶4

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶5

Presiding Offlcer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶6

OA Case No. 426 of 2022

¶7

HDFC Bank Limited, branch at Bimla Sadan, Holding No. 801/432, Ward No.37, Exhibition road, Patna 800 001

¶8

•...... Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s Jai Maa Durga Industries, a proprietorship concern through its proprietor Mr. Arvind Kumar, having its unit/shop at Gourachhini Road, Barh, District-Patna 803214, Bihar

¶11

Mr. Arvind Kumar (Proprietor/Guarantor), son of Kailash Saw, residing at Town/Village- 42, Brahmni Colony, Station Road, Barh, Anchal-Barh District-Patna- 803214, Bihar

¶12

Also at -Gourachhini Road, Barh, District-Patna 803214, Bihar

¶13

Tileshwari Devi (Guarantor/Mortgagor), wife of Kailash Saw, at 47, Langarapur, Badh, District-Patna-803214, Bihar.

¶14

Rincky Devi (Guarantor/Mortgagor), wife of Arvind Kumar, at Gaurakshani Road, Near Bhagirath Petrol Pump, Barh, District- Patna 803213, Bihar

¶15

Kailash Saw (Guarantor/Mortgager), son of Late Nandkishor Saw, residing at Town/Village- Brahmani Colony, Ward No.2, Near Post Office statiori Road, Barh, District-Patna 803213, Bihar.

¶16

....... Defendants.

¶17

Present:

¶18

For the Applicant : Shri Bhola Shankar, Advocate For the Defendants : None

¶19

Dated: 06.12.2023

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

1- The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 02.08.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.1,37,98,295.95 as on 28.02.2022 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 01.03.2022 with costs till realization.

¶22

The application has been duly registered and numbered as above.

t (h(\

OA 426 of 2022lJl

DRT. PATNA

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

¶27

The applicant bank is a company incoaporated under the Companies Act 1956 and registered under Banking Regulation Act, 1949, which is competent to file a suit.

¶28

Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship concern, defendant no.2 is the proprietor and Defendant no.2, 3, 4 & 5 are the guarantor as well as mortgagers of the loan facilities availed by the defendant no.1 firm.

¶29

Defendants have approached the applicant bank for sanction of Cash Credit facility vide loan application dated 27.08.2014 and at the request of the defendants the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility of Rs.75 La`kh vide sanction letter dated 19.11.2014 at the rate of interest 13.50% p.a. on various terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶30

To secure the loan facility the defendants executed relevant loan and security documents including the guarantee agreement and also hypothecated the movables in favour of the applicant bank by executing the hypothecation agreement.

¶31

In order to futher secure the loan facility the defendant no. 2, 3, 4 and 5 had created equitable mortgage of their properties by depositing the documents and title deeds in the applicant bank along with other related papers.

¶32

Defendants have again approached the applicant ban for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal cum enhancement sanction letter dated 05.11.2015 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.55 Lakh.

¶33

Defendants have again approached the applicant ban for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal cum enhancement

utu,

OA 426 of 2022 [Jl

PATNA

sanction letter dated 22.06.2016 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.75 Lakh.

¶38

Defendants have again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal sanction letter dated 27.12.2016 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.75 Lakh.

¶39

Defendants have again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal sanction letter dated 01.12.2017 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.75 Lakh.

¶40

Defendants have again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal sanction letter dated 09.07.2018 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.Ilo.00 Lakh.

¶41

Defendants have again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal sanction letter dated 07.12.2018 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.110.00 Lakh.

¶42

Defendants have again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal sanction letter dated 23.07.2019 the applicant bank further renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.125 .00 Lakh.

¶43

Defendants further approached the applicant bank for additional fund WCTL under GECL scheme and the same has been granted. The applicant bank additionally granted said Term Loan for working capital to the tune of Rs.22.15 Lakh and to secure the said loan facility the defendant have executed relevant loan and security documents.

¶44

¶45

DRT. PATNA OA 426 of 2022lJI

¶46

Defendants have again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility and as such by way of renewal sanction letter dated 24.02.202± the applicant bank futher renewed the said cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.110.00 Lakh and Terin Loan GECL facility to the tune of Rs22.15 Lakh.

¶47

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed 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 tuning as NPA on 29.01.2022. Thereafter the applicant bank had issued recall-cum-demand notice to the defendants on 18.07.2022.

¶48

Thus the total liability in the loan account is Rs.1,37,98,295.95 with pendent-lite and future interest contractual rate from 01.03.2022 till the realization. Since, the defendants have 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.

¶49

4- This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 07.09.2022 and 03.12.2022, requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules,1993. But the defendants have 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 defendants on 25.03.2023 in "Aaj" newspaper.

¶50

In response the defendant no.I and 2 have appeared by filing vakalatnama on 10.05.2023 but have failed to flle their written statement within the statutory period hence the right to file written was closed.

¶51

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendant mos. 3 to 5 have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants no. 3 to 5

¶52

OA 426 of 2022lJl

¶53

DRT. PATNA

¶54

to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against them on 06.07.2023.

¶55

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 Pappu Thakur, Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶56

Sl.No	Description of Documents Photocopies	Date of Execution	Amount (in Lakh)	Signature of Executants	Ex./ Am. No.
1	Loan application	27.08.2014		Def.no.1 &2	1
2	Sanction letter	19.11.2014	75.00	Bank andacceptedbyclef.no.1&2	2
3	MOE	21..11.2014	75.00	Def.no.3	3
4	Letter ofhypothecation	06.12.2014	75.00	Def.no. I &2	4
5	Power of attorney	06.12.2014	75.00	Defendants	5
6	Photocopy of saledeeds	-		-	6
7	Memorandum ofrecordingpasttransactionsofcreationofmortgage			Def.no.1 &2	7
8	Renewal-cur- enhancement sanction letter	05.11.2015		Bank and accepted by clef.no.1 &2	8
9	Enhancement sanction letter	22.06.2016		Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	9
10	Renewal sanction letter	27.12.2016	75.00	Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	10
11	Renewal sanction letter	01.12.2017	75.00	Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	11
12	Renewal sanction letter	09.07.2018	110.00	Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	12
13	Renewal sanction letter	07.12.2018	110.00	Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	13
14	Renewal sanction letter	23.07.2019	125.00	Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	14
15	GECL Sanction letter	23.08.2020	22.15	Bank andacceptedbyclef.no.1&2	15

¶57

`.,,:,~....,.,

¶58

¶59

I)RT. PATNA OA 426 of 2022lJl

¶60

16	Supplementary letter of continuingguarantee	12.06.2020	125.00	Def.no.2 to 5	16
17\|Undertaking	12.06.2020	22.15	Def.no.1 &2	17
18	Supplemental deed of simple mortgage	12.06.2020	22.15	Def.no.3 to 5	18
19	Facility curhypothecationagreement	12.06.2020	22.15	Def.no . I &2	19
20	De`claration cumundertaking&Memorandumofcreationofmortgage	12.06.2020		Def.no.1 &2	20
21	Renewal sanction letter	24.02.2021	132.15	Bank and accepted byclef.no.1&2	21
22	Recall-cum-demandnotice	18.07.2022		Bank	22
23	Statement ofaccounts	-		Bank	23

¶61

6- Heard arguments for learned counsel for applicant bank and perused the case record.

¶62

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have 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. 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. 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.

¶63

It is funher submitted by ld. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶64

7- It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their 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.

¶65

``.....;,I,,.....,..`

¶66

OA 426 of 2022lJl

¶67

DRT. PATNA

¶68

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 29.01.2022, whereas the present application has been filed on 02.08.2022. 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.

¶69

9- Shri Pappu Thakumr, Manager of the applicant bank has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶70

10- Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (I) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶71

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant, the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶72

The rule 12 (11) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker's Books evidence that Act,1891 (18 of 1891) shall apply to a 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.

¶73

Section 4 of Banker's Books evidence that Act,1891 runs as under-

¶74

S.4. Mode Of proof Of entries in bankers' books.rsubject to the provisions Of this Act, a certified copy Of any entry in a banker's book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence Of the existence Of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence Of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by low admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶75

As such the certified true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence. The statement of account rna.intained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of

'.,;.;,i.,,

OA 426 of 2022[Jl

DRT. PATNA

account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

¶80

11- On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the application, documents and affidavit, it is proved that the defendants have 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 defendants have executed various loan documents, as stated in the application and prove by afore said evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account.

¶81

12- The applicant bank has sought for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,37,98,295.95 with cost and futher interest at the contractual rate from 01.03.2022 till realization.

¶82

13- The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the claim made by the applicant bank is genuine and true. It is manifest that the defendants have not disputed the claim, therefore, the claim referred to the tribunal is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶83

14- In 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 defendants jointly and severally of Rs. I,37,98,295.95 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 18% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 02.08.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the flnal order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶84

ORDER

¶85

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is, allowed ex-parte and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.1,37,98,295.95 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 18% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 02.08.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶86

OA 426 of 2022lJl

¶87

I)RT. PATNA

¶88

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

¶89

Defendants are 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 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.

¶90

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 defendants, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants.

¶91

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 12.01.2024. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶92

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on o6th day of December, 2023

¶93

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶94

-:----i----:':---.-[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶95

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA

¶96

Cer

¶97

FORM NO. 9

¶98

[See Regu!alion 24{ I )]

¶99

I)EBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶100

2nd Floor, {A a & F Wing) Kapun Thckur Sadan

¶101

Kendnya Kammchan Parisar (GPOA) Ashiana Digl`a Road

BC No. 770/2022

Case No: OA/426/2022

]n the Matter of:

(CH- I) HDFC BANK BIMLA SADAN HOLI)ING N0 Sol/432. WARD NO.-37. EXHiBr"oN ROAD, PATNA,

App',cant(s)

PATNA ,BIHAR J30000l

----- Versus -----

Tot

(CD- I) M/S JAI MAA DURGA INI)USTRIES AND OTHERS

¶112

i::r',i:!:v::;P,:°:#io::t"8ho:'::hroh?n|ei°ora¥rB:rT.`nd

¶113

Distncl-Patna Patiia ,BIHAR -803214

¶114

(CI)-2) MR. ARVIND KUMAR

¶115

(PROPRIETOR/GUARANTOR)

¶116

SON OF KAILASH sAw REslDING Ai` TOwNrvlLLAGE. 42 BRAl]MNI COLONY, STATION ROAD BARH, ANCHAL-BARH, DISTRICT-PATNA-PIN CODE-803214 BIHAR

¶117

Also A'.

¶118

ARVIND KUMAR SON OF KAILASH SAW. RESIDING AT

¶119

:?s#irvcT#A&BA-A,##%:¥FBE!2i:,AB¥hBAARRE`

¶120

tcD- 3) TILESHWARI DEVI

¶121

Defendant(s)

¶122

(GUARANTOR/MORTGAGOR)

¶123

WIFE IF KAILASH SAW, RESIDING AT;- 47, LANGARAPUR, LANGARAPUR, BADI1, DIS1`RICTIATNA, PIN CODE-803214 BIHAR

¶124

(cD-4) RINCKy DEvl (GUARANroR;MORTGAGOR) WIFE OF ARVIND KUMAR ADDRESS.-GAURAKSHANI ROAD, NEAR BHAGIRA" PETROL PUMP, BARH, DISTRICT-PATNA, PIN CODE-803213, BIHAR

¶125

(CD-S) KAILASH SAW (GUARANl`OR/MORTGAcOR) SON OF LAme IVANDKisHOR sAw REsiDING AT:-SON OF NANDKisHOR sAw. REslDING AT TOwNrvlLLAGE. BRAIIMANI COLONY, WARD NO.- BARH, DISTRICT-

¶126

PAINA, PIN CODE-803213 BIHAR

¶127

a:=gyLELy£.2Eb:=±gg;:r'drRBJfzanz2s£LlhipseiJ2natmmmjdyJiEmLE±ungivL[tigbmed&]_Th±

¶128

1ntermsoffinalorderdated06/12/2023passeddythisTribunalintheabovementionedcase,itisorderedthattheApplicantCertificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a slim o1` Rs. I 3798295.95 along with cost, expenses and intcrcst from the 02/08/2022 i c. date ot. filing/witheffectivedateoftheOA/426/2022andfutureintereslfromorderdatetlllthedateofrealisationjnfull,jointlyorseverally from the Certificate Debtors, hereimafter refeiTed to as:-

¶129

I-.n I	o CD Name M/S JAI MAA DURGA INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS	I Loan type	In'. Type"ode Compound ,Interest(Monthly)	I lnt. Ra,e 18 I	EfTecdve ^{I Date} o2/o8„o22	Order I Dale 06/ I 2re023	I Amount(R§.) 13798295.95	Llubility type Jointly Andseyerall I?'lyJointly	Lt'teres'(a8ol, OrderDl I.tntercstAs on orderDat e1mercstAs	RCIAmount(Rs.) 13798295.95
	MR. ARVIND KUMAR (PROPRIETOR/GUARANTOR)	I	Compeund Ilntorcst(Monthly),	I18I	02;08ra022	,06/12/20231	I }798295 95	_ AndSever8ll yJointly	on Ol.derDt aeInteresl As	I }798295.95
3	TILESHWARI DEvl (GUARANTOR/MORTGAGOR)		Compound , [nteresl(Monthly ) I	181	02/08„022	06/12/2023;	13798295.95 ,	AndSeverall yJom'y	on OrderDate	13798295 95
	RINCKY DEVI (GUARANroR/I\roRTCIAGOR)	,	Compound `h'eltst(Monthly)I	18,	02708ra022 I	06; I 2re023;	137982t)5.95 I	AndSeverally I	In(ere.s As on OrdDale	137982.5 05
5	KAILASH SAW(GUARANroRrMORTGAGOR)	I !	Compound[11teres' M-9Qthly-.) __	18	o2ro8;2022	o6/12„023'I	I 3798295.95	Jointly I AndSeverally	nterest AsonOrderDate	I 3798295.95

¶130

In ca= of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amoimt within 30 days, same shau be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/dypotliecated assets as wel I as other personal movable/ Iminovable assets of the certiricate debtors.

¶131

The mortgaged or liypothecated 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 .he Recovery certificdte issued under Section 19(22) of Rec,overy of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993.

¶132

Parties are dirccled to appear before ASIIISH KUMAR , Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBIINAL PATNA on 12/01/2024

¶133

The Recovery Officer shall realize the anounl as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescrlbed iinder Sectlons 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts I)ue to Banks and Financlal lnstlfutions Act, 1993 (as amended from time to tlme) from the atiove named Certificate Debtors.

¶134

This certificatehasbeen issuedundermysigrlature and seal o"heTrlbunal on th"6/'2/2023 V

¶135

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTs REcOvERy TRIBUNAL pAn`iA

¶136

[seeReffi

¶137

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA 2ndFloor,(A.8&FWing)KarpuriThakurSadan,KendriyaKaramchariParisar

¶138

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

¶139

---.----------------~~~-`-~~----.------------------------------^---~

¶140

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE

MEMO 0F COSTS

E£NO. 770;2ng

Case No: OA/426/2022

Applicant(s): HDFC BANK

¶146

Versus

¶147

Defendant(s): M/S JAI MAA DURGA INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS

¶148

Sr.No.	JItem of Costs
I.	Fee on the applicationProcessFees(Inc.Publication)AdvocateFees9ommissionertheceiverIvaluatioE4Ecurity FeeMiscellaneousCharges
2.`3
4
5.
	TOtal costs: Rs.

¶149

Amount in Rs.140000
0
0
0
0
140000

¶150

Place: PATNA

¶151

Date: 06/12/2023

¶152

pREslfoof=ICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶153

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Hdfc Bank v. M/s Jai Maa Durga Industries and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. M/s Jai Maa Durga Industries and Others

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Mr Hasan Farhaz

Punjab National Bank versus Akhilesh Kumar Singh @ Bara Babu Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Raghvendra Kumar Singh & Ors.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Raj Kumar

Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank versus Mukesh Kumar Mishra

Hdfc Bank versus Naj Kumar Hobby