Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd.

DRT22 Dec 2023OA/560/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank’s application for recovery of loan dues of approx. Rs.5.42 crores along with interest and costs against the company and individual guarantors, following the bank’s evidence of loan advance, default, and security creation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.5,42,70,324.84 with interest @10.35% (Cash Credit) and @7.50% (GECL) from 01.01.2022, issuance of Recovery Certificate, and distribution of sale proceeds from mortgaged/hypothecated ass

Bank of India versus M/S Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 560 of 2022

¶4

Date of Institution: 05.02.2022

¶5

Date of Decision: 22.12.2023

¶6

Bank of India, one of its Branch at 3 Circular Road, Amritsar, Punjab.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

M/s Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd., having registered office 8/11 (Basement), East Patel Nagar, Delhi, through its Directors.

¶10

2nd Address:- 48E, Joshi Colony, Amritsar.

¶11

3rd Address:- 27, Ranjit Vihar, Near Police Station, Loharka Road, Amritsar.

¶12

Sh. Rajinder Arora @ Rajinder Kumar Arora S/o Sh. Santokh Chand Arora, R/o H. No.20-A, Green Avenue, Amritsar (Director of M/s Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd.).

¶13

Ms. Khushboo Arora D/o Sh. Rajinder Arora @ Rajinder Kumar Arora, R/o H. No.20-A, Green Avenue, Amritsar (Director of M/s Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd.).

¶14

Mrs. Vishakha Arora W/o Sh. Rajinder Arora @ Rajinder Kumar Arora, R/o H. No.20-A, Green Avenue, Amritsar.

¶15

Ms. Sukriti Arora D/o Sh. Rajinder Arora @ Rajinder Kumar Arora, R/o H. No.20-A, Green Avenue, Amritsar.

¶16

……….Defendants

¶17

Advocates

¶18

Sh. K. P. S. Dhillon, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- Ex parte .

¶19

OA for the Recovery of Rs.5,42,70,324.84p with interest with monthly rests from 01.01.2022.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

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.5,42,70,324.84p with interest against M/s Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd And Others (defendants).

¶22

¶23

Bank’s case is that on 23.07.2014, it had granted Cash Credit Limit of Rs.2.00 crores (Rs.2.00 crores against Hypothecation of stocks and Rs.50.00 lacs against hypothecation of book debts, maximum Rs.2.00 crores) to defendant no.1 through its Directors defendant no.2 and 3 for business purpose. Defendant nos.2 to 4 stood as guarantors. To secure the loan, Defendant no.4 had mortgaged her immovable property consisting of 3 story (GF+2 Floor), residential property having situated at Wakia Rakba Tung Bala Urban Abadi, Plot No.20, Green Avenue, Near Maqbool Road, Gali Mandir Wali, Lekha House, Amritsar, Punjab admeasuring 816.66 sq. yards (fully detailed in para No.5(vi) of the application). Defendants had also created hypothecation of stocks like shawls, stoles, carpets, blankets etc. The loan was chargeable to interest @14.10% per annum with monthly rests.

¶24

2(A). On 15.03.2017, at the request of defendants, bank had enhanced the Cash Credit Limit from Rs.2.00 crores to Rs.3.00 crores. Defendant nos.2 to 4 stood as guarantors. To secure the loan, Defendant no.4 had extended the equitable mortgage of the property consisting of 3 story (GF+2 Floor), residential property having situated at Wakia Rakba Tung Bala Urban Abadi, Plot No.20, Green Avenue, Near Maqbool Road, Gali Mandir Wali, Lekha House, Amritsar, Punjab admeasuring 816.66 sq. yards (fully detailed in para No.5(ix) of the application). Defendants had also created hypothecation of stocks like shawls, stoles, carpets, blankets etc. The said loan facility was chargeable to interest @11.40% per annum with monthly rests.

¶25

2(B). Thereafter, at the request of defendants, bank had enhanced the Cash Credit Limit from Rs.3.00 crores to Rs.4.50 crores on 23.04.2020. Defendant nos.2 to 5 stood as guarantors. To secure the loan, Defendant no.4 and 5 had mortgaged their four immovable properties, fully detailed

¶26

¶27

in para no.5(xvii) of the application). Defendants had also created hypothecation of stocks like shawls, stoles, carpets, blankets etc. The said loan facility was chargeable to interest @9.75% per annum with monthly rests.

¶28

2(C). On 21.08.2020, at the request of defendant no.1 through its Directors defendant nos.2 and 3, bank had sanctioned WCTL of Rs.56.00 lacs in addition to the existing Cash Credit Limit of Rs.4.50 crores. Defendant nos.2 to 5 stood as guarantors. Defendant no.1 had also pledged an FDR of Rs.1.50 lacs in favour of the bank. The said loan facility was chargeable to interest @7.50% per annum with monthly rests. On 31.12.2021, a sum of Rs.5,42,70,324.84p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶29

On 20.04.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 19.09.2022, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Chief Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-81. 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.5.06 crores (Rs.450.00 lacs in Cash Credit Limit and Rs.56.00 lacs in WCTL) and on 31.12.2021, a sum of Rs.5,42,70,324.84p was due i.e. Rs.4,84,47,844.60p in Cash Credit Limit and Rs.58,22,480.24p in GECL.

¶30

¶31

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.5,42,70,324.84p (Rupees Five Crore Forty-Two Lacs Seventy Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Four And Paisa Eighty Four Only) with interest @10.35% per annum with monthly rests in Cash Credit Limit of Rs.450.00 lacs and @7.50% per annum with monthly rests in GECL of Rs.56.00 lacs from 01.01.2022, 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 properties, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application and hypothecated assets/goods, as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶32

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 24.01.2024 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage properties and hypothecated assets/goods 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.

¶33

Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 22^nd December, 2023 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Bank of India v. M/S Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S Accent Impex Pvt. Ltd.

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 M/s Jul Bricks Industry

State Bank of India versus Mr H Samuela

Canara Bank versus M/S M.K. Construction and Suppliers

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Rajinder Kumar Bareja

Union Bank of India versus M/S Daya International

Canara Bank versus Sri S. Hoysala