Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sagar Setia

DRT8 Nov 2023OA/852/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of outstanding loan dues of Rs. 27,69,640 from the defendant. The court held the defendant liable and granted a Recovery Certificate, adjourning realisation proceedings to a future date.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 27,69,640 with 8% simple interest; liberty to recover from sale of mortgaged property or by attachment of personal assets.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sagar Setia — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 852/2023

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.05.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 8^th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

Union Bank of India , having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021, having its Branch at Union Bank of India (Earlier Andhra Bank), SCF 54, Sector 8, Panchkula-134108, Haryana, through its Attorney holder, Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Branch Head/Principal Officer, IFSC Code: UBIN0811041

¶6

…..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Sagar Setia s/o Sh. Tejinder Pal Setia r/o House No. 138, Bhera Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110087

¶9

Second Address: Flat No. 1203, Block E, 12^th Floor, Mona Green Apartment, VIP Road, Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab140603

¶10

....Defendant

¶11

Argued by: Sh. Ravinder Kumar counsel for the applicant bank Defendant ex parte vide order dated 01.07.2023

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank

¶14

under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), a gainst the defendant for recovery of Rs.27,69,640/-

¶15

OA/852/2023 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SAGAR SETIA 2

¶16

(Rupees Twenty Seven Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred

¶17

and Forty Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Branch Head/Principal Officer of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide authority letter dated 13.12.2022, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶18

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for grant of housing loan facility of Rs. 39.50 lac vide loan application dated 14.06.2017, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶19

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facility to the defendant vide sanction letter dated 30.06.2017, Annexure-A3 (copy), as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶20

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendant executed various loan and security documents, i.e. housing loan agreement dated 30.06.2017, Annexure-A4 (copy), buyers agreement dated 13.06.2017, Annexure-A5 (copy), letter dated 30.06.2017 regarding terms and conditions of the sanctioned limit, Annexure-A10 (copy), undertaking and declaration dated 30.06.2017 regarding terms and conditions, Annexure-11 (copy), consent letter dated 30.06.2017, Annexure-A12 (copy), consent clause dated 14.06.2017 regarding disclosure of information to the CIBIL, Annexure-A13 (copy) and demand promissory note dated 30.04.2017, Annexure-A14 (copy). 5. The aforesaid limit was further secured by Flat/Pent house No. 1201, Block E, 12^th Floor, Mona Green Apartment, VIP Road, Zirakpur (Punjab), measuring 1842 Square Feet, situated in the

¶21

OA/852/2023 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SAGAR SETIA 3

¶22

revenue estate of Bishanpura, Hadbast No. 44, Joint Tehsil Zirakpur, Tehsil Derabassi, District SAS Nagar, Punjab.

¶23

The documents related to property are as under:

¶24

i. Allotment letter dated 13.06.2017, Annexure-A6 (copy).

¶25

ii. Valuation report dated 20.06.2017, Annexure-A7 (copy).

¶26

iii. Non-Encumbrance certificate, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶27

iv. NOC dated 23.06.2017 from India Bulls Home, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶28

v. Security letter dated 30.06.2017, Annexure-A15 (copy).

¶29

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendant but he failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank leading to the loan account becoming irregular and it being classified as NPA on 29.07.2022. The applicant bank executed legal audit report dated 01.07.2017, Annexure-A17 (copy), but to no avail.

¶30

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.27,69,640/(Rupees Twenty Seven Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Only), is recoverable against the defendant as per statement of account duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexure-A18 (colly) (copy).

¶31

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

¶32

Notice of the Original Application was duly served upon the defendant, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendant,

¶33

OA/852/2023 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SAGAR SETIA 4

¶34

thus, the defendant was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 01.07.2023 .

¶35

In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Authorised Officer of the applicant bank was filed.

¶36

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶37

It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant bank that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendant for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A18 , it is clear that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. It is further clear that the defendant had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendant 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.27,69,640/(Rupees Twenty Seven Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Only) from the defendant. 11. In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned,

¶38

the applicant bank has not claimed any particular rate of interest. In sanction letter, Annexure-A3 (copy), the rate of interest has been mentioned @8.75% per annum.

¶39

OA/852/2023 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SAGAR SETIA 5

¶40

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, purpose of loan, i.e. housing, 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 appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶41

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs holding that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.27,69,640/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 23.05.2023 , till the date of realisation of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property of the defendant 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 defendant. However, the applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶42

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶43

OA/852/2023 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SAGAR SETIA 6

¶44

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on

¶45

21.12.2023.

¶46

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendant through registered/speed post. This order be also

¶47

uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶48

Pronounced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sagar Setia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sagar Setia

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

Shri Mangesh So Sadashivrao Khedkar versus Agrasen Nagari Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Amit Fabricators Iron Industries

Central Bank of India versus M/S Priya Footwear

Canara Bank versus M/S Adarsh Cashew Industries

Canara Bank versus Smt. Ashalatha Shetty

Hdfc Bank versus Aditya Pappu