Allowed

State Bank of India v. Dinesh Badrinarayan Mishra

DRT17 Aug 2023OA/571/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte Original Application, the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I at Mumbai allowed the State Bank of India's claim for recovery of Rs. 54,93,663/- along with interest against the home loan defaulters, directing immediate payment and a prohibition on dealing with their assets.

What did the court decide?

Directive to pay Rs. 54,93,663/- plus interest within 60 days; stay on dealing with properties; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Dinesh Badrinarayan… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

OA 571 of 2022

¶2

Registered on:.28.09.2022 Decided on :17.08.2023

¶3

THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT MUMBAI ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 571 of 2022

¶4

STATE BANK OF INDIA ) Having its Office at Stressed Assets Resolution ) Group (SARG), Retail (South), The Arcade, 2^nd ) Floor, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, ) Mumbai- 400 005 and its Branch amongst others) Functioning at PBB Porvorim Branch, Goa, ) Rasecc Panaji and Stressed Asset Recovery ) Branch, First Floor, Kerom Building, Next to SBI) Wagle Industrial Branch, Plot No. A-112, Road ) No. 22 Circle, Wagle Estate, Thane (West) - ) 400 064, )

¶5

… APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

MR. DINESH BADRINARAYAN ) MISHRA Adult, Indian Inhabitant ) i. 136/A, Bernard Carneiro Vadi ) Morombi-O-Grande, Tiswadi, ) North Goa- 403 005. )

¶8

ii. H. No. 96/1 Adelina Complex, ) C/O Trinety Bevreges, Goa, ) Velha- 403 108 )

¶9

iii. Flat No. 303, B wing, Building ) COEXIST Alto Tordo, Salvador ) Mundo, Porvorim- 403 101 )

¶10

iv. C/O LIG/15, Goa Housing Board) Thivim Bardezn- 403 502 )

¶11

MRS. RITADEVI DINESH MISHRA ) i. 136/A, Bernard Carneiro Vadi ) Morombi-O-Grande, Tiswadi, ) North Goa- 403 005. )

¶12

ii. H. No. 96/1 Adelina Complex, )

¶13

Page 1 of 5

¶14

OA 571 of 2022

¶15

C/O Trinety Bevreges, Goa, ) Velha- 403 108 ) iii. Flat No. 303, B wing, Building ) COEXIST Alto Tordo, Salvador ) Mundo, Porvorim- 403 101 )

¶16

... DEFENDANTS

¶17

Counsel for the Applicant: Adv. Sachin Koli Counsel for the Defendants: Ex -parte _________________________________________________________

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

The Original Application has been filed by the Applicant against the Defendants for recovery of Rs.54,93,663/- (Rupees Fifty Four Lakh Ninety Three Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Three Only) alongwith further interest @9.1% p.a. compounded with monthly rests from the date of filing of the present OA till its realization.

¶20

Facts as succinctly set out in the Original Application are that the Defendant No. 1 & 2 approached the Applicant for Home Loan of Rs.47,54,000 for purchase of Flat No. 303, with House No. 1198/2/T1, admeasuring 98.60 Sq. Mts. Built up area (86.76 Sq. Mtrs. Carpet area), on the Third Floor, in Wing “B” of Building project “COEXIST” along with proportionate undivided share in the said portion of land and said property known as “Paithan” or “Durig” surveyed under S/No.128/2, situated at Village Salvador do Mundo, Bardex, North Goa, Goa. The said request was considered by the Applicant and sanctioned Home Loan of Rs.47,54,000/- and Funding of Home

¶21

Page 2 of 5

¶22

OA 571 of 2022

¶23

Loan Insurance cover of Rs. 1,32,558/-, totalling to Rs. 48,86,558/to Defendant No. 1 & 2 on 10.10.2018. The Defendant No. 1 & 2 agreed to repay the said Home Loan and Home Loan Insurance within 235 equated monthly instalments of Rs. 44,616/- p.m. commencing from November 2018.

¶24

In consideration of sanction the above loan, the Defendants had executed and delivered the following security documents in favour of Applicant:

¶25

i. Memorandum of Loan Agreement for Home Loan granted to Public.

¶26

ii. Repayment letter executed by the Defendants.

¶27

iii. Deed of Undertaking.

¶28

iv. Consent Letter.

¶29

v. Operations Letter.

¶30

vi. Home Insurance Option Letter.

¶31

In order to secure the aforesaid Housing Loan, the Defendant No.1 and 2 deposited the Original Title Deeds in respect of the said Flat on 10.10.2018 with the Applicant with an intention to create Equitable Mortgage to secure the said credit facility disbursed to Defendant No. 1 & 2 by the Applicant and also deposited the Original Title Deeds in respect of the said Flat on 10.10.2018 and further executed the title documents in favour of the Applicant.

¶32

However, the Defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and was irregular in the repayment of the loan amount. Thus, the accounts were classified as NPA on 05.02.2021. Thereafter, the Defendant No.1 & 2 issued Demand Notice dated 23.04.2021 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and called upon the

¶33

Page 3 of 5

¶34

OA 571 of 2022

¶35

Defendants to make the payment of the outstanding dues but they failed to pay the dues. Further, the Legal Notice was sent to the Defendants to clear the dues but to no avail. Hence, the present OA has been filed.

¶36

Notices were issued to the Defendants. Despite service, none appeared for the Defendants nor any WS has been filed thus, they are proceeded ex-parte today vide separate order.

¶37

The Applicant Bank has produced all the Original Loan documents and other relevant documents along with their Claim Affidavit filed through their Chief Manager Mr. Chandrakumar D. Kamble.

¶38

I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and perused the record.

¶39

The witness of the Applicant Bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the OA. Even otherwise the whole case of the Applicant Bank is based on documents and the witness has fully proved all these documents as against the Defendant. In my view there is no question of disbelieving the evidence led by the Applicant Bank and the Applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The liability of Defendant No. 1 & 2 is joint and several.

¶40

In the light of above discussions, the Original Application by the Applicant bank deserves to be allowed against the Defendants.

Page 4 of 5

OA 571 of 2022

O R D E R

i. I allow this OA and direct the Defendant No.1 and 2 to pay to the Applicant, within a period of 60 days, a sum of Rs.54,93,663/- (Rupees Fifty Four Lakh Ninety Three Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Three Only) alongwith further interest @9.1% p.a. compounded with monthly rests from the date of filing of the present OA till its realization.

¶45

ii. Failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged property as well as other personal moveable and immoveable assets of the Defendants.

¶46

iii. Defendants are hereby directed not to deal with their properties till further direction of Ld. Recovery Officer.

¶47

iv. Defendants shall also pay the cost and expenses of the OA.

¶48

v. Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer of this Tribunal. Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record.

¶49

Place: Mumbai (Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar) Date :17.08.2023 Presiding Officer, DRT-1, Mumbai.

¶50

Tjs/-

¶51

Page 5 of 5

State Bank of India v. Dinesh Badrinarayan Mishra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Dinesh Badrinarayan Mishra

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

Mrs. Payal Gidwani Tiwari versus Piramal Capital

Indian Overseas Bank versus Hooghly Shipbreakers Limited

State Bank of India versus Mr. Rushabh

Chandri Wax Specialities Pvt. Ltd. versus Punjab National Bank

Union Bank of India versus Abhijit N Shirodkar

Union Bank of India versus Boshan Developers Pvt. Ltd.