Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Mr. Vitthal Shankar Ranavade, Prop. Laxmi Enterprises

DRT21 Aug 2024OA/1005/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune allowed the bank "s original application for recovery of dues from the defendant, who failed to appear. The court reduced the claim amount by deducting penal interest and modified the future interest rate to 9% per annum simple interest from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 20,80,581 plus future interest at 9% p.a. simple interest; issue of Recovery Certificate; costs.

Hdfc Bank versus Mr. Vitthal Shankar Ranavade, Prop… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on	: 26.10.2018
Registered on	: 27.10.2022
Decided on	: 21.08.2024
Duration	: Y M D
	05 09 25

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1005/2022.

¶3

HDFC Bank Limited,

¶4

A Banking Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at HDFC Bank House, C.S. No. 6/242, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai and one of office at Department for Special Operations, Peninsula Business Park, B Wing, 4^th Floor, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – 400013.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Vitthal Shankar Ranavade, Proprietor of M/s. Laxmi Enterprises, Age 65 years, Occ. Business,

¶8

a) R/at House No. 75, Opposite Grampanchayat Office, Mulshi, Pirangut, Pune 412 115.

¶9

b) Gat No. 102, Jyotiba Nagar, Opposite Jyotiba Mangal Karyalay, Talwade – 411062.

(OA No. 1005/2022)

Page 1 of 5

Sanap

c) At Post Nande, Taluka Mulshi, District

Pune 412115.

.. Defendant

APPEARANCES

For Applicant Advocate Yogesh Hirve. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶18

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.21,99,613/-

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

(Delivered on 21^st August, 2024)

¶21

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.21,99,613/- together with future interest @10.90% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶22

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶23

The defendant is a proprietary concern engaged in business of Engineering goods and supply of the said parts/goods. As per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit facility of Rs.30,00,000/- to the defendant vide Sanction Letter dated 31.10.2015. Considering the request application of the defendant dated 14.10.2016, the applicant Bank renewed the said facility on 29.11.2016

¶24

In order to secure the Cash Credit facility, the defendant executed necessary loan and security documents in

¶25

(OA No. 1005/2022) Page 2 of 5

¶26

Sanap

¶27

favour of the applicant Bank along with deed of hypothecation, in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶28

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 19.11.2017, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as Non Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Therefore, on 06.10.2018, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶29

Hence, this application is filed.

¶30

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 01.05.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶31

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Ashwin Narayan Indulkar, Senior Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1-1 to AW-1-16 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No. 1005/2022)

Page 3 of 5

Sanap

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant Bank.

¶36

Since the defendant failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶37

The applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets, therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶38

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.1,19,033/-, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.21,99,613/- is reduced to Rs.20,80,581/-.

¶39

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @10.90% per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶40

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(A) Original Application No.1005/2022 is allowed with

(OA No. 1005/2022)

Page 4 of 5

Sanap

proportionate costs.

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.20,80,581/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Eighty Thousand Five Hundred Eighty One only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26.10.2018 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶48

¶49

(D) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendant.

¶50

Place : Pune Date : 21.08.2024

¶51

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶52

(OA No. 1005/2022)

¶53

Page 5 of 5

¶54

Sanap

Hdfc Bank v. Mr. Vitthal Shankar Ranavade, Prop. Laxmi Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Mr. Vitthal Shankar Ranavade, Prop. Laxmi Enterprises

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Dada Pawar

Saraswat Cooperative Bank Limited versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Digambar Ghayal

Icici Bank Limited versus Sachin Godambe

Prashant Pratap Ahir versus Hdfc Bank

Central Bank of India versus Sampat Askat