Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Ms Lord Sai Traders

DRT21 Nov 2023OA/874/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 53,13,141.33 outstanding from borrowers. While acknowledging the bank's claim, the tribunal exercised discretion to reduce future interest to 8% per annum instead of contract rates due to pandemic circumstances and gender of a guarantor.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 53,13,141.33 plus simple interest at 8% p.a. issued; issued Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Lord Sai Traders — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.874/2023

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 26.05.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 21^st DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

HDFC Bank Limited , having its registered office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel-(West), Mumbai-400013, also at Plot No. 1-15, Sector 101, Alpha IT City, SAS Nagar, Mohali, through its Authorised Representative, Sh. Kabir Chopra

¶6

…..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Lord Sai Traders, through its Proprietor, Sh. Ajit Singh, Moti Colony, New Sohna Chowk, Palwal, Haryana-121102 [email protected]

¶9

Sh. Ajit Singh s/o Sh. Chander Pal r/o House No. 60, Darana (117), Hassanpur, Palwal, Haryana-121107

¶10

Smt. Shweta w/o Sh. Ajit Singh r/o House No. 60, Darana (117), Hassanpur, Palwal, Haryana-121107

¶11

....Defendants

¶12

Argued by: Ms Deepti Toni proxy counsel for Sh. Gagandeep Toni counsel the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 05.08.2023

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendants for recovery of Rs.53,13,141.33/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred Forty One and Thirty Three

¶15

OA/874/2023 HDFC BANK VS M/S LORD SAI TRADERS AND OTHERS 2

¶16

Paisa Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Kabir Chopra, Authorised Representative of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide resolution dated 16.10.2021 passed by Board Of Directors, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶17

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendant No. 1 through defendant No. 2 had approached the applicant bank for grant of business loan facility of 15 lac, term loan facility-I of Rs. 62 lac and term loan facility-II of Rs. 8 lac vide application Forms dated 23.07.2019, 08.12.2020 and 24.02.2022, Annexures-A2, A3 and A4 (copy). Defendant No. 3 stood as a guarantor for repayment of the loan.

¶18

The applicant bank sanctioned business loan facility of Rs. 7,61,099/-, term loan facility-I of Rs. 56,11,340/- and term loan facility-II of Rs. 8,26,261/- to the defendants as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed various loans and security documents, i.e. terms and conditions applicable to business loan dated 17.12.2020, Annexure-A5 (copy), agreement for auto loan dated 17.12.2020, Annexure-A6 (copy), agreement for loan and guarantee dated 21.03.2022, Annexure-A7 (copy) and irrevocable power of attorneys dated 25.07.2019 and 21.03.2022, Annexures-A8 and A9 (copy).

¶20

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 leading to the loan accounts becoming irregular and those being classified as NPA. The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 26.04.2023,

¶21

OA/874/2023 HDFC BANK VS M/S LORD SAI TRADERS AND OTHERS 3

¶22

Annexure-A13 and its original postal receipts, Annexures-A14, A15, A16 and A17 , but to no avail.

¶23

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts, a sum of Rs.53,13,141.33/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred Forty One and Thirty Three Paisa Only), is recoverable against the defendants as per statements of accounts, duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexures-A10, A11 and A12 (copy).

¶24

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

¶25

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 05.08.2023 .

¶26

In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Kabir Chopra, Manager Legal of the applicant bank was filed.

¶27

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

¶28

It was argued by the learned proxy counsel for the applicant bank 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 A17 , 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

¶29

OA/874/2023 HDFC BANK VS M/S LORD SAI TRADERS AND OTHERS 4

¶30

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.53,13,141.33/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred Forty One and Thirty Three Paisa Only) from the defendants.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause, has claimed rate of interest @16.50% per annum. In terms and conditions applicable to business loan dated 17.12.2020, Annexure-A5 (copy), agreement for auto loan dated 17.12.2020, Annexure-A6 (copy), agreement for loan and guarantee dated 21.03.2022, Annexure-A7 (copy), the rate of interest has been mentioned @16.50% per annum in term loan facility-I, @7.63% in term loan facility-II and @9.70% per annum in business loan facility, respectively.

¶32

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. business and purchase of vehicle, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears and defendant No. 3 being a female, 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.

¶33

OA/874/2023 HDFC BANK VS M/S LORD SAI TRADERS AND OTHERS 5

¶34

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs holding that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.53,13,141.33/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred Forty One and Thirty Three Paisa Only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 26.05.2023 , till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joined as well as several. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from th

¶35

e sale of 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. However, the applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 01.01.2024.

¶38

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.

¶39

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

Hdfc Bank v. Ms Lord Sai Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Ms Lord Sai Traders

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 Marx Alexander

Sulaiman K T versus The Manjeri Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Dhairjya Ram Deka

Mrs G K Rani versus State Bank of India

Ms Habib Oil and Grains Processing versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S Mahavir Jain Enterprises