Allowed

Smt Preeti Mehta v. Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd.

DRT20 Dec 2023SA/869/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Punjab National Bank for recovery of outstanding dues of Rs. 3.99 crore along with interest. The court declared the respondents jointly and severally liable and directed the sale of mortgaged and personal assets for realization.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 3,99,79,176.54 with interest and costs; mortgaged and personal properties to be sold; in-restriction imposed; Recovery Certificate issued under Section 19(2).

Smt Preeti Mehta versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR (for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶2

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

¶3

Qriginal Application^No. -869/202²

¶4

Punjab National Bank, Circle Sastra Center, Gwalior (M.P)

¶5

Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

I IWs Shri Anjani Traders, Through its ProprietressPratibha Rally, Wo Shri Gulshan Rally, R"/o Sadar Bazar Morar, Gwalior M.P 4751l0

¶8

2 Smt. Priya Rally, Wo Gautam Rai Rally, R/o Sadar Bazar Morar, Gwalior M.P 4751l0

¶9

J Shri Gautam RaiRally, S/o Shri Gulshan Rally, R/o Sadar Bazar Morar, Gwalior M.P 4751l0

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : ShriM.D.N. Bajpai, Advocate

Defendants

: Ex-parte

JUDGMENT

(Dated : 20th December,2023)

¶16

l. The Applicant-Bank has filed the^present Original Application u/s l9 of^Recovery of^{Debtsand BankruptcyAct on} 30106122 against the^{Defendantsfor recovery ofRs.} 3,99,79,176.541-^{(Rupees Three Crore, Ninety Nine Lac,}

¶17

¶18

oA869t22 ..

¶19

Seventy Nine Thousand, One Hundred Seventy Six and Paisa Fifty Four only) along with interest and other reliefs as stated,

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.l through its Proprietress and Defendant No.2 and 3, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit Facility of Rs.300 Lac on 09108116, FITL of Rs. 48.42 on 28llll19 and another FITL of Rs. 20,36,811/- on 21108120. In consideration of the aforesaid sanctions the Defendant No.l to 3 as borrowers and Defendant No.2 and 3 in their individual capacity as guarantors in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have also created equitable mortgage over the immovable properties, i.e.,

¶21

(i) Land & Building at Survey No.359, Village-Sirol, Gwalior Area 0.115 Hect belonging to Defendant No.2 and 3.

¶22

(iD Land & Building Survey No.36llminl (Area 0.188 Hect), 362lminl (Area 0.0033 Hect), 362lmin2 (Area 0.033 Hect) Village-Sirol Gwalior belonging to Defendant No.2 and 3.

¶23

(iii) Commercial Complex having area ground floor I12.09 sq. mtr., first floor 99.78 sq. mtr, second floor 99.78 sq mtr land & building at M. No.2l1490 ward, no.27 Saudagar Santar, Morar, Gwalior belonging to Defendant No.l and 3.

¶24

The Defendants availed the credit facilities and also executed Balance Confirmation Letter on 10106l19 but failed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Legal Notice and initiation of action under the Securitisation Act on 1010612l by the Applicant Bank. The Applicant-Bank has relied upon the

¶25

¶26

oA869/22

¶27

documents at Ex. A-l to A-21 which were proved by Shri Gurpreet Singh, Deputy Manager.

¶28

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were proceeded exparte vide order dated 04109123. There is therefore, no reason to disbelieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the claim amount together with interest and costs. The Applicant-Bank in its application has claimed interest @12%^{p.a. with monthly rests.However, I feel it fair and} reasonable to grant interest @12% p.a. simple pendentelite and future till realization of the dues. The mortgaged properties are liable to be sold for recovery of amount due along with the personal properties and assets ofthe Defendants.

¶29

The Original Application is allowed and it is ordered as under-

¶30

i) The Defendants do pay jointly and severally Rs. 3,99,79,176.541- (Rupees Three Crore, Ninety Nine Lac, Seventy Nine Thousand, One Hundred Seventy Six and paisa Fifty Four only) together with pendentelite and future interest @12%^{per annum simple from the date} of filing of the OA, i.e., 30106122, with costs till its realization.

¶31

iD The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged as well as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for realization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumberin o E),

¶32

¶33

oA869t22 -

¶34

alienating or in any way dealing with their properties/assets without first paying the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶35

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued u/s 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The applicant bank may file a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶36

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 20th Day of December,2023.

¶37

.>9 aO' 1a (R Niwas Patel) Presidine Officer

Smt Preeti Mehta v. Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Preeti Mehta v. Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bank of Baroda versus Pooja Rathore W/O Ankit Rathore

State Bank of India versus Dinesh Kumar Tripathi

Punjab National Bank versus Mekalsuta Kisan Seva Kendra

M/S Rana Greens versus Uco Bank

Union Bank of India versus M/S Santosh Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus M/S Rakhi Agro