Allowed

Canara Bank v. Abhinav Matsya Vyavasay Vikas Va Prakirya Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit

DRT11 Dec 2023OA/598/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune, allowed an application by Canara Bank for recovery of dues from a co-operative society and its directors. The court reduced typographical costs and adjusted future interest to 9% p.a., decreeing repayment of Rs. 69,35,567.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 69,35,567 with future interest at 9% p.a. A recovery certificate and directive to sell mortgaged properties were issued.

Canara Bank versus Abhinav Matsya Vyavasay Vikas Va… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on: 12.05.2022 Registered on: 04.07.2022 Decided on: 11.12.2023 Duration: Y M D 1 6 19

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.598/2022

¶3

Canara Bank,

¶4

A body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking Act), 1970 having its Head Office at 112 J.C. Road, Bangalore-2 and amongst other places, having branch office at: 3^rd Floor, Red Cross Building, M.G. Road, Camp, Pune-411 001, known as “Hi Tech Agriculture Finance Branch”.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Abhinav Matsya Vyavasay Vikas Va Prakriya Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, A Co-operative Society having their Factory address at:-

¶8

(a) Anushkati Nagar(Mula Dam), Varwandi, Tal. Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar-413 722.

¶9

(b) Marketing Office at 71/73, Botawala Building Ground Floor, Alkesh Dinesh Modi Marg, Opposite Bombay Stock Exchange, Fort,

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 1 of 8

[ npb ]

Mumbai-400 023 Through its Chairman Mr. Dattatray Narayan Khule,

¶14

Mr. Bharat Pandurang Dhokane, Age-60 Years, Occupation-Business, R/at: D-112, Puru Housing Society, Airport Road, Indrayani Nagar, Pune411 032.

¶15

Mr. Dattatray Narayan Khule, Age-63 Years, Occupation-Business, R/at-Varwani, Anushkati Nagar, Tal. Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar-413 722.

¶16

Mrs. Shubhangi Bharat Dhokane, Age-60 Years, Occupation-Business, R/at: D-112, Puru Housing Society, Airport Road, Indrayani Nagar, Pune- … Defendants

¶17

411 032.

¶18

APPEARANCES

¶19

For the Applicant Mrs. Veena C. Kori - Advocate For Defendants Ex parte

¶20

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.69,60,567/-

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

(Delivered on 11^th December, 2023)

¶23

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for

¶24

recovery of Rs.69,60,567/- in respect of Overdraft Account together with future interest @15.65% p.a. thereon from the date of filing of Original Application i.e. 12^th May, 2022 till

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 2 of 8

[ npb ]

repayment/ realization of entire dues from defendant Nos.1 to 4.

¶29

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶30

Defendant No.1 is a Co-operative Society of which defendant Nos.2 and 4 are the Directors and defendant No.3 is the Chairman. The said Society is engaged in the business of Integrated Fisheries.

¶31

Defendant No.1 is the borrower and defendant Nos.2 to 4 are the guarantors to defendant No.1 for the credit facility availed by it from the applicant Bank.

¶32

The applicant contended that on 01^st March, 2019 defendants approached it for Overdraft facility of Rs.80,00,000/- towards their working capital. On 14^th March, 2019 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Overdraft of Rs.50,00,000/- with interest @15.65% p.a.

¶33

The loan transaction and security documents were executed by defendants as set out in paragraph Nos.5.4 to 5.4.6 of the Original Application.

¶34

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant Nos.2, 4 and their children Mr. Abhinav Bharat Dhokane and Miss Preetam Bharat Dhokane availed Housing Loan to

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 3 of 8

[ npb ]

purchase the property more particularly described at Sr.No.5.4.7 (i) &(ii) and created mortgage by deposit of title deeds on 1^st August, 2018 registered in the Office of the subRegistrar, Haveli No.10 at Sr.No.1531/2018. Defendant No.4 is the owner of the Flat bearing No.1108 mentioned therein.

¶39

The applicant Bank further contended that after availing credit facilities, defendants failed to observe the terms and conditions of repayment. In spite of repeated demands made by the applicant Bank, defendants neither paid interest nor regularized the account.

¶40

Therefore, the applicant classified the account of defendants as Non-Performing Asset on 18^th July, 2020.

¶41

Thereafter, the applicant Bank through its Advocate issued Demand Notice on 25^th February, 2020 calling upon defendants to liquidate the dues.

¶42

The applicant Bank further contended that defendants have signed and executed Acknowledgement of Debt and Security dated 30^th June, 2021 acknowledging the outstanding dues.

¶43

Thereafter, the applicant Bank issued mandatory Notice

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 4 of 8

[ npb ]

to the Registrar, Co-operative Society, Ahmednagar on 20^th December, 2021.

¶48

Despite issuance of two Notices, defendants did not pay the outstanding dues.

¶49

Hence, this application is filed.

¶50

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 07^th December, 2023 below the Application (Exhibit-1).

¶51

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Jain Gour, Authorized Officer which supports the case of the applicant elucidated in the application.

¶52

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original loan transaction documents (Sr.Nos.AW-1 to AW-29) which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶53

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant Bank.

¶54

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 5 of 8

[ npb ]

application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶59

The applicant Bank has claimed Rs.25,000/- towards cost of Typing, Notice and Xeroxing which cannot be granted and this amount is deducted from total claim amount. Thus, total claim amount is reduced from Rs.69,60,567/- to Rs.69,35,567/-.

¶60

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @15.65% p.a. for Overdraft account. However, considering facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. it would be just and reasonable.

¶61

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶62

ORDER

¶63

(A) Original Application No.598/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶64

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 4 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.69,35,567/- (Rupees Sixty-Nine Lakhs ThirtyFive Thousand Five Hundred and Sixty-Seven

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 6 of 8

[ npb ]

only) with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 12^th May, 2022 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶69

¶70

i) All that piece and parcel of Non Agricultural Land bearing Plot No.D-112 admeasuring about 350.625 sq. mtrs. situated at S.No.235A, Hissa No.4 to 18, totally admeasuring 6H 0R of Village Lohagaon, Tal. Haveli, Dist. Pune along with 3 storied structure admeasuring 317.29 sq. mtrs. standing thereon.

¶71

ii) Flat bearing No.1108 admeasuring carpet area 432 sq. mtrs. situated on the Eleventh Floor of “A” Wing in the project popularly known as “Goodwill 24” situated and constructed on Land bearing S.No.283/2, 283/3+4/2/1 and 283/3+4/2/2 of Village Lohagaon, Pune within the limits of Pune Municipal

(OA No.598/2022)

Page 7 of 8

[ npb ]

Corporation, Taluka-Haveli, District Pune.

¶76

more particularly mentioned in paragraph No.5.4.7 of the Original Application.

¶77

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged properties to recover its dues. (E) Issue Recovery Certificate. (F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant Bank and defendants.

¶78

Place : Pune Date : 11.12.2023

¶79

Sd/- (Dilip G Murumkar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶80

(OA No.598/2022)

¶81

Page 8 of 8

¶82

[ npb ]

Canara Bank v. Abhinav Matsya Vyavasay Vikas Va Prakirya Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Abhinav Matsya Vyavasay Vikas Va Prakirya Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vikram

Hdfc Bank versus Vijay Baburao Gujar

Bank of Baroda versus Abhishek Patil

State Bank of India versus Harsha Somnath Avhad

State Bank of India versus Mrs Savita Vilas Chandgude

Punjab National Bank versus Shantilal Zagade