Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Rajbir Satvinder Jain

DRT24 Jan 2023OA/767/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Punjab National Bank against borrowers for recovery of Rs. 26,12,751.26 along with interest. The Tribunal, exercising discretion considering pandemic impact, granted uniform simple interest at 10% per annum from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Defendants declared liable to pay Rs. 26,12,751.26 with simple interest at 10% per annum from 27.04.2022. Recovery Certificate issued. Liberty to recover through sale of mortgaged property or attachme

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Rajbir Satvinder Jain — Money Laundering | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.767/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 27.04.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 24^th DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶5

Punjab National Bank (erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce) , a body corporate, constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at Plot No. 4, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 and the erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce has recently been amalgamated with the applicant bank i.e. Punjab National Bank w.e.f. 01.04.2020 vide Gazette of India Notification GSR 153 (E), GSR 154 (E) & GSR 156 (E) dated 04.03.2020 and amongst others one Branch at Indri, District Karnal, through its constituent Attorney, Sh. Vinod, Senior Manager, Circle Sastra Centre, Bay No. 21-22, Sector 12, Karnal, Haryana 132001

¶6

....Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Rajbir Satvinder Nain, a Proprietor concern, C/o Booth No. 15, Grain Market, Indri, District Karnal, Haryana-132041 through its Proprietor, Sh. Rajbir Singh

¶9

Sh. Rajbir Singh S/o Sh. Kishna Ram R/o VPO Kamalpur Rodan, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal, Haryana-132041, Proprietor of M/s Rajbir Satvinder Nain

¶10

.....Defendants

¶11

Argued by: Sh. Davis proxy counsel for Sh. Harsh Garg counsel for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 28.10.2022

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

¶14

Act’ for brevity) against the defendants for recovery of Rs.26,12,751.26p (Rupees Twenty Six lacs Twelve Thousand Seven

¶15

OA/767/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs M/s RAJBIR SATVINDER NAIN AND ANR

¶16

¶17

Hundred Fifty One and Twenty Six Paisa Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Vinod, Senior Manager of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 30.11.2015, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶18

The brief facts as per the Original Application are that defendant No. 1 through defendant No. 2 had approached the applicant bank for renewal and enhancement of OD facility of Rs.16 lacs to Rs.20 lacs and Funded Interest Term Loan facility of Rs 0.73 lacs .

¶19

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facilities to the defendants vide sanction letter dated 08.09.2014 and agreement for FITL dated 27.02.2019, Annexures-A3 and A7 (copy) as per the terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed various loan and security documents, i.e. supplemental agreement to secure credit/loan facility dated 15.09.2014, Annexure-A4 (copy), common agreement dated 15.09.2014, Annexure-A5 (copy) and affidavit dated 08.09.2014 of declaring LRs, Annexure-A6 (copy).

¶21

The aforesaid loans were further secured by creation of equitable mortgage of commercial property in respect of defendant No.2 bearing Shop No. 15 measuring 60 Square Metre situated in New Grain Market, Indri, Haryana, fully detailed in para Nos. 3A and 5.7 of the Original Application.

¶22

The documents relating to the mortgage are as under:

¶23

i. Letter dated 16.09.2014 by mortgagor to the bank with regard to deposit of original title deed and intent to create equitable mortgage, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶24

ii. Sale deed No. 88/1 dated 25.04.2006 registered with Sub-Registrar Indri, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶25

iii. Valuation report dated 18.09.2021, Annexure-A14 (copy).

¶26

OA/767/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs M/s RAJBIR SATVINDER NAIN AND ANR

¶27

¶28

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facilities were duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan accounts became irregular and those were declared NPA on 31.03.2021. The defendants executed balance and security confirmation letters dated 25.02.2016, 08.05.2018 and 23.09.2020, Annexure-A10 (colly) (copy). The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide notices dated 08.07.2021 and 23.11.2021 under sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Annexures-A11 and A12 (copy), but to no avail.

¶29

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.26,12,751.26p (Rupees Twenty Six lacs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty One and Twenty Six Paisa Only) is recoverable against the defendants as per statement of accounts dated 31.03.2022, Annexure-A13 (copy) along with certificate under Banker’s Books Evidence Act, 2000.

¶30

Since the defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.

¶31

Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants, thus, the defendants were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 28.10.2022 .

¶32

In support of the contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Vinod, Senior Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶33

This Tribunal has heard ex parte arguments advanced by the learned proxy counsel and gone through the record carefully.

¶34

OA/767/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs M/s RAJBIR SATVINDER NAIN AND ANR

¶35

¶36

It was argued by the learned counsel that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendants for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A14 , it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them. It is further clear that the defendants had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,12,751.26p (Rupees Twenty Six lacs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty One and Twenty Six Paisa Only) from the defendants.

¶37

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank, in relief clause, has claimed rate of interest @9.25% per annum with monthly rests in overdraft facility and @8.25% per annum with monthly rests in FITL facility. In sanction letter dated 08.09.2014 and agreement for FITL dated 27.02.2019, Annexures-A3 and A7 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @11.25% per annum with monthly rests in overdraft facility and @8.75% per annum with monthly rests in FITL facility.

¶38

This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogatives of mercy and magnanimity are the brightest jewels in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including the Pandemic Covid-19 affecting businesses, nature of the mortgage property, purpose of loan, i.e. business, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and

¶39

OA/767/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs M/s RAJBIR SATVINDER NAIN AND ANR

¶40

¶41

appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @10% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶42

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum Rs.26,12,751.26p (Rupees Twenty Six lacs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty One and Twenty Six Paisa Only) with current and future simple interest @10% per annum w.e.f. 27.04.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joint as well as several. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property of the defendants in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 or otherwise. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶43

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶44

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 21.02.2023.

¶45

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendants through registered/speed post. This order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶46

Announced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak)

¶47

Presiding Officer DRT-2,Chandigarh

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Rajbir Satvinder Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Rajbir Satvinder Jain

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

State Bank of India versus Ms Taj Agencies

Ms Vishnu Beej Bhandar versus State Bank of India

Ms Morinda Rice and General Mills versus State Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Pushplata Kumari and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Shiv Shakti Feed Industries

Canara Bank versus Smt Sherry Khurana