Allowed

Bank of India v. Hanu Enterprises

DRT27 Mar 2023OA/65/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Originatiou Application by Bank of India to recover debts aggregating Rs. 1.08 crore against Hanu Enterprises and its proprietor. The Court approved interest rates and ordered attachment of mortgaged and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 1,08,92,241.00 with interest; mortgaged and personal property attached; recovery certificate issued.

Bank of India versus Hanu Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'bte Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶4

Originol Applicotion No. - 65122

¶5

Bank of lndia, Kanchanbaug, lndore (M.P.)

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Hanu Enterprises, 01 ) Through its Proprietor-Baxiram Jain, 9, Shihurkar Complex, 3, lmti Baar, Rajwada, lndore

¶9

1. Baxiram Jain, S/o Hajarimal Jain, R/o 405, Clerk Colony, lndore (M.P.) Defendants

¶10

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Shreyas Dubey, Advocate

¶11

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

(Dated : 27th March,2023l

¶14

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Originat Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 11101122 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,08,92,241.00 (Rupees One Crore, Eight tac, Ninety Two Thousand, Two Hundred and Fourty One onty) atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶15

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its Proprietor Defendant No.-2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned maximum WC Limit of Rs.45 Lac and Term Loan of Rs. 50 lacon10101l17, FITL-1 of Rs. 15.06 Lac and FITL-2 of Rs. 1.01 Lac aggregating Rs. 111.07 Lac. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facilities the Defendants in addition to execution of loan documents have also created equitable mortgage over the immovabte property, i.e., a[l that part of immobite property Shop No.-9, Shihurkar Comptex, constructed on the Ptot No.-3, situated at Siremal Bafna Marg, lndore, admeasuring 158 sq.ft.; betonging to Defendant No.-2. The Defendants availed the credit facitities but faited to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recall Notice on 05104121 by the Appticant Bank.

¶16

¶17

oA65/22

¶18

The Appticant-Bank has relied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-38 which were proved by Shri Pankaj Bhandari, Senior Manager.

¶19

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19109/22. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the'case, I opine that the Defendants are^jointty and severatly tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its application has claimed interest @9.55%^p.a. with monthly rests for Cash Credit Account, interest @10.05% p.a. with monthty rests for Term Loan, interest @6.85% p.a. with monthly rests for FITL-1 and FITL-2 accounts. However, I feet it fair and reasonable to grant interest @9.50%^p.a. for cash credit account, interest @10%^p.a. for term loan account and interest @6.50% p.a. for both FITL accounts simpte pendentelite and future titl realization of the dues. The mortgaged^property is tiabte to be so[d for recovery of amount due atong with the^{personalproperties} and assets of the Defendants.

¶20

The Originat Apptication is allowed and it is ordered as underi) The Defendants do pay^jointty and severatty Rs. 1,08,92,241 '00 (Rupees One Crore, Eight Lac, Ninety Two Thousand, Two Hundred and Fourty One onty) together with^pendentelite and future interest @9.50%^{p.a. for cash} credit account, interest @10%^p.a. for term loan account^{and interest @6.50%} p.a. for both the FITL accounts, simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e', 11101 lZ2, with costs tit[ its reatization.

¶21

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitled to sett the^{mortgagedas wetl as} persona[ properties and assets of the Defendants for realization^{of its dues.} The Defendants are hereby restrained by^{means of injunction from depteting,} transferring, encumbering,^{alienatingor in any way deating with their} properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the^{AppticantBank.}

¶22

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued^{uls19(22) of Recoveryof Debts} and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant^{bank may fite a memo of cost withiri7 days} for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶23

Judgment^{pronouncedin the open court on this Day of March, 2023.}

¶24

( m Niwa atet)
Presidins Officer

Bank of India v. Hanu Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Hanu Enterprises

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

Sarthak Seeds and Agrotech Propriter of Shri Ram Lakhan Meena versus Icici Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Amandeep Hotel Pvt. Ltd.

Smt Urmila Jonwal Wo Shri Suresh Jonwal versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited

Bank of India versus Aaryan Industries

Ms Mehar Enterprises versus Canara Bank

Shri Rohit Sethi versus Aditya Birla Housing Finance Ltd.