Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Sumeet Kumar and others

DRT3 Jul 2023OA/55/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Baroda's ex-parte application for recovery of Rs.21,20,946/- along with interest. The defendants failed to appear; the bank proved loan sanctions and defaults via documents. The court issued a recovery certificate under S. 19(22) RDB Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs.21,20,946/- plus interest at 9.85% p.a. from date of filing; mortgaged assets attached; defendants directed to appear before Recovery Officer.

Bank of Baroda versus Sumeet Kumar and others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DRT,PATNA

¶2

OA 55 of 2022 [J]

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶4

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana DighaRoad at PATNA-800025

¶5

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶6

OA Case no. : 55 of 2022

¶7

Bank of Baroda, At Bettiah, Kavivar Nepali Path, Bettiah, 845438.

¶8

....... Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Sumeet Kumar S/o Surendra Kishore Singh, RIo Village Singhachhapar, Ward no. 3, P.O.-Ganaouli, Sariswa Road, P.S.Bettiah, Muffasil, Bettiah, West Champaran, Pin-845438.

¶11

Surendra Kishore Singh S/o Sukhdeo Narain Singh, RIo Village Singhachhapar, Ward no. 3, P.O.-Ganaouli, Sariswa Road, P.S.Bettiah, Muffasil, Bettiah, West Champaran, Pin-845438.

¶12

Mamta Singh Wlo Sujit Kumar Singh, RIo Village Singhachhapar, Ward no. 3, P.O.-Ganaouli, Sariswa Road, P.S.-Bettiah, Muffasil, Bettiah, West Champaran, Pin-845438.

¶13

...Defendants.

¶14

Present:

¶15

For the Applicant : Shri Manish Kishore, Advocate For the Defendants : None

¶16

Dated: 03.07.2023

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

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 24.1.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.21 ,20,946/- as on 4.12.2021 alongwith pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 5.12.2021 with costs till realization.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

The applicant bank body corporate constituted under Banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at Baroda Bhawan, R.C. Dutt Road, Alkapuri, Baroda390007 and amongst others a Branch Office at Bettiah,Kavivar Nepali Path, Bettiah, 845438.

¶22

The defendant no. 1 required financial assistance for purchasing new smart paper cup forming machine for his running unit in the name of

DRT,PATNA

OA 55 of 2022 [J]

Mis Shree Batuknath Udyog. Thus he approached the bank for such facilities by presenting an application on 13.10.2016 for term loan ofRs.8 lakh. The bank sanctioned term loan of RS.8 lakh on 13.10.2016. The defendants executed the various loan documents i.e. DP note, letter of installment, letter of authority, composite hypothecation agreement, declaration cum undertaking cum authority and PDR. The rate of interest as agreed by the defendants in respect of credit facility payable to the bank is 11.85% p.a. compounded monthly and liability being overdue additional interest of 2% shall also be payable as penal interest to the bank. The loan proposal under KCC limit to the tune of Rs.15 lakh was duly considered and after appraisal it was found that the defendants no. 2 was eligible for such facility to the tune of Rs. 15 lakh for raising agricultural crop. Accordingly it was sanctioned by the bank on 16.3.2017. The defendants executed registered deed of mortgage in favour of the bank details given at page 10 of OA. The rate of interest as agreed by the defendants in respect of KCC limit payable to the bank is 7% p.a. compounded half yearly and in case of liability becoming overdue additional interest of 2% shall also be payable as penal interest to the bank.

¶27

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 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 30.4.2021.

¶28

Thus the total liability in the loan account is Rs.21,20,946/- with pendentelite and future interest at the contractual rate from 5.12.2021. till the realization.

¶29

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.

¶30

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.

¶31

4- U/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 defendants by registered/speed post on 16.4.2022, and summons/notices issued requiring the defendants to show-cause within 30 days of the service of summons/notices as to why relief prayed for, should not be granted.

¶32

On perusal of the case records, it is clear that on 16.4.2022, summons/notices were sent to the defendants, but the defendants have not

,\ } \L.!)'7-;'l v

DRT,PATNA

OA 55 of 2022 [J)

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 29.7.2022 in "Hindustan" newspaper.

¶38

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants 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 the defendants 17.4.2023.

¶39

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 of Shri Animesh Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows. :-

¶40

SI.No	Description of photocopies Documents	Date of Execution	Amount	Signature of executant	Ex.! Ann. No.
1	application	13.10.2016	...	defendant no. 1	1
2	sanction letter	13.10.2016	Rs.8lakh	bank	2
3	DP note	13.10.2016	Rs.81akh	defendant no. 1	3
4	Letter of installment	13.10.2016	Rs.8lakh	defendant no. 1	4
5	letter of authority	13.10.2016	Rs.8lakh	defendant no. 1	5
6	composite hypothecation	13.10.2016	Rs.8lakh	defendant no. 1	6
7	declaration cum undertaking	13.10.2016	...	defendant no. 1	7
8	PDR	13.10.2016	Rs.8lakh	defendant no. 1	8
9	letter	13.10.2016	...	bank	9
10	loan application	7.3.2017	Rs.25lakh	defendants	10
II	sanction letter	16.3.2017	RS.151akh	bank	11
12	copy of registered mortgage deed no. 3592	16.3.2017	....	...	12
13	DP note	16.3.2017	Rs.15lakh	defendant no. 1	13
14	composite hypothecation agreement	16.3.2017	RS.151akh	defendant no. 1	14
15	power of attorney	16.3.2017	...	defendants	15
16	Undertaking	16.3.2017	RS.151akh	defendants	16
17	declaration cum	....	...	defendants	17

OA 55 of 2022 [J]

DRT,PATNA

	undertaking
18	PDR	16.3.2017	Rs.15lakh	defendants	18
19	renewal application	29.9.2018	...	bank	19
20	Demand notice	1.2.2019	...	bank	20
21	letter of acknowledgement	8.10.2019	...	bank and defendant no. 1	21
22	renewal application	28.2.2020	..	bank	22
23	possession notice	22.11.2019	...	bank	23
24	legal notice	5.12.2019	'"	bank	24
25	letter of acknowledgement of debt	29.2.2020	...	bank and defendant no. 1	25
26	Statement of account	as on 4.12.2021	Rs.21,20,946/-	bank	26

¶45

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

¶46

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.

¶47

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.

¶48

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.

¶49

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 30.4.2021, whereas the present application has been filed on 24.1.2022 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.

¶50

9- In the affidavit of Shri Anish Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, has stated that he is well acquainted with the facts of the .'\

OA 55 of 2022 [J)

DRT,PATNA

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.

¶56

The documents as stated above reveal 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, which strength the case of the applicant bank.

¶57

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.

¶58

10Since, the case was proceeded ex-parte against defendants, all contentions raised and documents produced by plaintiff remained unrebutted and the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant as per law. 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, 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 alongwith application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶59

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 defendants and facility was availed by the defendants as stated in the application.

¶60

12The applicant bank has sought for recovery of a sum of Rs.21,20,946/- with cost and further interest at the contractual rate from 5.12.2021till realization.

¶61

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 rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶62

14On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the pleadings, documents and affidavit, it is proved that the applicant has charged

OA 55 of 2022 [J]

DRT,PATNA

interest against defendants in terms of documents and as per directives of RBI.

¶67

15None of the defendants 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 defendants have not disputed the claim, therefore, the claim referred to the tribunal is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶68

16In Indian Bank Vs. Blue Jaggers Estates Limited and others [2010] 8 SCC 129,the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has observed as under-

¶69

"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."

¶70

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 defendantsjointly and severally of Rs.21 ,20,946/- alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @9.85% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 24.1.2022 (The date of filing of this O.A.) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends ofjustice.

¶71

ORDER

¶72

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is, allowed exparte and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank it's debts amounting to Rs.21,20,946/- alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @9.85% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 24.1.2022 (The date of filing of this O.A.) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶73

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

¶74

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

OA 55 0(2022 [J]

DRT,PATNA

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.

¶79

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.

¶80

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 4.9.2023. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶81

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

¶82

-> {p\7\0 [Kaushalendra Yadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶83

Dictated & corrected by me.

¶84

"-.:..=......:....:...,;'~ [Sec Regulation ;)4( I»)

¶85

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL I'AT:,\

¶86

Thakur Sudan, Kendriya Karumchari 1':1rI,.1l i l ,J'(}i), Ashiana Digha Road, l'atna-~00025.

¶87

2nd Floor, (A. B &. F Wing) Karpuri

¶88

RECOVERY CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 19(1) READ WITH SECTJON 19(1l) OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT,J.m, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

¶89

RC No. 411/2023

¶90

IN Case No: OA/SS/2022

¶91

In the Matter of:

¶92

(CH- 1) BANK OF BARODA BETTIAH KAVIVARNEPALI PATHBETTIAH PASHCHIM CHAMPARAN ,BIHAR -8454311

¶93

Applieant(s}

¶94

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

¶95

To,

¶96

(CD- 1) SUMEET KUMAR AND UTHERS . S'o Surendra Kishore Singh resident of Village Singhachhapar, Ward No No.3, .p.O Ganaouli, Sariswa Road P.S. Bettiah Muffasil. Bettiah, Pashchim Champaran .BIHAR -845438

¶97

(CD- 2) SURENDRA KISHORE SINGH SON OF SUKHDEV NARA1N SINGH, RIO VILLAGE SINGHACHHAPAR WARD NO.3, P.O. GANAOULl, SARISWA ROAD, P.S. BETTIAH MUFFASIL, BETTIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN PIN 845438

¶98

Defendant(s)

¶99

(CD- 3) MAMTA SINGH WIO SUJIT KUMAR SINGH VILLAGE SINGHACHHAI'AR WARD NO.3, P.O. GANAOULL SARISWA ROAD, P.S. BETTIAH MUFFASIL, BETTIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN PIN 845438

¶100

&.I;~y"'yrtificate for Rs 2120946.00 l_Rypees Twenty. One Lakhs Twenty. Thousands.Nine Hundred Ilor!Y.Six Ouly._l

¶101

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. 2120946.00 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 24/0 I 12022 i.e. date of tiling 1 with effective date of the OA/S5/2022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶102

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale ofthe mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors .. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question an: hereby attached and shall be subject to thefinal order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recov cry certificate issued under Section 19(22) ofRecovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 Parties arc directed to appear before MANOJ KUMAR, Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECUVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 04/09/2023. 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.

¶103

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 03/07/2023

¶104

PRESIlJING OFFICER DEBTS HECOVFRY TRIBUNAl. PATNA

¶105

FORM NO. 10

¶106

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶107

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶108

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

¶109

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

¶110

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

¶111

RC No. 411/2023

¶112

¶113

Case No: OA/55/2022

¶114

Applicant(s): BANK OF BARODA Versus

¶115

Defendant(s): SUMEET KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶116

•

¶117

otal Costs: Rs. 24000

¶118

Place: PATNA

¶119

Date: 03/07/2023

¶120

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶121

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

¶122

Date of order or proceeding	DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA Order with the Signature of the Court	Office action taken with data
	OA 55 of 2022
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. presidi~cer
03.07.2023	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. V Presiding Officer

Bank of Baroda v. Sumeet Kumar and others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Sumeet Kumar and others

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 M/s Shree Batuknath Udyog and Others

Canara Bank versus Ravinder Kumar