Allowed

Central Bank of India v. M/S Raghuwanshi Poha Udyog

DRT24 Aug 2023OA/960/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's origin Application for recovery of dues of Rs. 44.70 lakh. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable, adjusted interest to 11.25%, and ordered a Recovery Certificate issuance.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 44,70,131.93 with interest at 11.25% p.a. from 03/08/22, costs, and issuance of a Recovery Certificate under Section 19(2).

Central Bank of India versus M/S Raghuwanshi Poha Udyog — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Originol Application No. - 960122

¶5

Centra[ Bank of lndia, Mandideep, Distt.-Raisen (M.P.)

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

01 ) M/s Raghuwanshi Poha Udyog, Through its Proprietor' Shri Satish Singh Raghuwanshi, Khasra No.-1 l7l1lZ, Vittage-Kirat Nagar, Chandetkhedi, Chiktod Road Diversion, Bhojpur Road, Mandideep, District-Raisen (M.P.l 462046

¶9

1. Satish Singh Raghuwanshi @ Satish Raghuwanshi, S/o Shri Ramesh Singh RAghuwanshi, R/o House No.-48, Ward No.-4, Near Radha Vattabh Mandir, Sitampura, Burhanpur (M.P.) 450331 Defendants

¶10

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Kapil Duggat, Advocate

¶11

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶12

JUDGMENT loatea^{: T4Flugust, zOZf} I

¶13

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Originat Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 03/08122 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 44,70,131.93 (Rupees Fourty Four Lac, Seventy Thousand, One Hundred Thirty One and Paisa Ninety Three only) atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶14

2, 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 Term Loan of Rs. 22.13 lac and Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 12.75 Lac aggregating Rs.34.88 Lac on 08111117 which were subsequently restructured and outstanding interest was recapitalized into Funded lnterest Term Loans (FITLs) on 27/17119 and further granted FITL under COVID-19 RBLR Linked Term Loan on'10/11l20. in consideration of the sanction of various credit facitities the Defendants executed requisite loan documents. The Defendants availed the credit facilities but faited to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recall Notice on 06/07/22 by the

¶15

¶16

oA960122

¶17

Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon^{the documentsat Ex A'1} to A-25 which were^proved by Shri Sanjeev Suman, Senior Manager.

¶18

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 16/03123. 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 severatty liabte to pay the claim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has claimed interest @1 1.30%^p.a. with monthty rests. However, I feel it fair and reasonable to grant interest @11.25% p.a. simpte pendentetite and future titl reatization of the dues. The personal properties and assets of the Defendants are liab(e to be sotd for recovery of amount due.

¶19

The Original Apptication is atlowed and it is ordered as under-

¶20

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severally Rs. 44,70,131.93 (Rupees Fourty Four Lac, Seventy Thousand, One Hundred Thirty One and Paisa Ninety Three onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @11 .25%^per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e., 03/08/22, with costs titl its realization.

¶21

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitled to set[ the personal propert'ies and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way dealing with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶22

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued u/s 19(221 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶23

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this Day of 24th August, 20

¶24

sD^?(*,t

¶25

¶26

lRam^{f iwaiRatety} Presidinq Officer

Central Bank of India v. M/S Raghuwanshi Poha Udyog

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. M/S Raghuwanshi Poha Udyog

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 Sachin Thanesuriya

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Vikas Traders

Ms Natural Cement Pvt. Ltd. Director of Umashankar Rohit versus Punjab National Bank

SBI Staff Housing Cooperative Society versus Housing Urban Development Corporation Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Vinayak Motors

Central Bank of India versus Sukhdeen Prasad Kol