Allowed

Canara Bank v. Shri Datta Fabricators

DRT16 Feb 2024OA/1053/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues. Recognizing borrowers' default, the Tribunal modified penal interest and reduced future interest rate to 9% per annum before granting recovery against principal, interest, and security.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to pay admit Rs.3,98,11,021/- with future interest @9% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued directing sale of mortgaged/hypothecated properties to recover dues.

Canara Bank versus Shri Datta Fabricators — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 17.02.2022 Registered on : 17.12.2022 Decided on : 16.02.2024 Duration : Y M D 02 00 00

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1053/2022.

¶3

Canara Bank, (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), A Body Corporate constituted by and under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its head office at 112 JC Road, Bangalore and branch office at Shop No. 4- 12 N Building, Empire Estate, CTS No. 4510/1, Mumbai Pune Road, Chinchwad, Pune 411019.

¶4

.. Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 M/s. Shri Datta Fabricators, A Partnership Firm, Abhijit Plaza, Shop No. 9, Plot No. RM 103, G Block, MIDC, Near KSB Chowk, Shahunagar, Chinchwad 411019.

¶7

2 Karuna Gajanan Shete, Row House B-1, Vishal Vihar, Plot No. 48, Sector 16, PCNTDA, Pune 411044.

(OA No. 1053/2022)

Page 1 of 6

Sanap

3 Smita Pandurang Sutar, Plot No. RL 199 G-Block, MIDC, Chinchwad-19.

¶12

4 Pandurang Nivrutti Sutar, Plot No. RL 199 G-Block, MIDC, Chinchwad-19.

¶13

.. Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For Applicant Advocate Sudha Koloti. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶16

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.4,07,32,616/-

¶17

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 16^th February, 2024)

¶18

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of total sum of Rs.4,07,32,616/- together with future interest @16.25% per annum with monthly rests from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶20

Defendant No.1 is a Partnership firm and defendant Nos.2 to 4 are its partners. Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 are also guarantors to the Credit facilities sanctioned by applicant Bank to defendant No.1. Defendant Nos.1 to 4 approached the applicant Bank requesting Credit facilities. Accordingly, as per the application

(OA No. 1053/2022)

Page 2 of 6

Sanap

of the defendants, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed following Credit facilities aggregating to Rs.4,64,00,000/- to the defendants.

¶25

Name of the facility	Amount	Date of sanction
SODH	Rs.4,50,00,000/-	05.08.2019
Inland BG	Rs.14,00,000/-	05.08.2019

¶26

In order to secure the aforesaid facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank along with deed of hypothecation of Raw Material, Semi finished goods, finished goods of the firm and Factory Shed at Plot No.19-D/1/2/2 and 19D/1/2/5 at Pimpri Industrial Area and deed of mortgage of (1) Plot No.19-D/1/2/2 in D Block, MIDC, Akurdi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune; (2) Plot No. 19-D/1/2/5 in D-1 Block of Pimpri Industrial Area, Akurdi, District Pune and (3) Row House No. B-1, Vishal Vihar Apartment Condominium, Plot No. 48, Sector No. 16, Chikhali, Taluka Haveli, District Pune in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶27

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the

(OA No. 1053/2022)

Page 3 of 6

Sanap

accounts. Despite repeated calls, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶32

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 16.01.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶33

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Raghuveer C, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-23 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶34

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

¶35

Since the defendants 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.

¶36

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.9,21,595/(Rs.8,57,428/- for SODH Loan and Rs.64,167/- for FITL facility), which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total

(OA No. 1053/2022)

Page 4 of 6

Sanap

claim amount of Rs.4,07,32,616/- is reduced to Rs.3,98,11,021/-.

¶41

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @16.25% 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.

¶42

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(A) Original Application No.1053/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶45

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.3,98,11,021/(Rupees Three Crores Ninety Eight Lakhs Eleven Thousand Twenty One only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 17.02.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶46

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting hypothecation of Raw Material, Semi finished goods and finished goods of the firm and Factory Shed at Plot No.19-D/1/2/2 and 19

(OA No. 1053/2022)

Page 5 of 6

Sanap

D1/2/5 at Pimpri Industrial Area, more particularly described in Para No. 6(c) of the Original Application and mortgage of (1) Plot No.19-D/1/2/2 in D Block, MIDC, Akurdi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune; (2) Plot No. 19-D/1/2/5 in D-1 Block of Pimpri Industrial Area, Akurdi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune and (3) Row House No. B-1, Vishal Vihar Apartment Condominium, Plot No. 48, Sector No. 16, Chikhali, Taluka Haveli, District Pune, more particularly described in Para No. 6 (d) of the Original Application.

¶51

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the hypothecated and mortgaged properties to recover its dues.

¶52

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶53

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

¶54

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 16.02.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶55

(OA No. 1053/2022)

¶56

Page 6 of 6

¶57

Sanap

Canara Bank v. Shri Datta Fabricators

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Shri Datta Fabricators

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of Maharashtra versus Praveenkumar Menon

Canara Bank versus Gayatri Engineering Solutions Prop Shri. Milind N. Joshi

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vibhavari Ravikiran Jadhav

Union Bank of India versus Ajinkya Nitin Rajebhosale

Canara Bank versus M/S Susheel Engineers Prop Mr. Sidram Gundappa Sirure

Idbi Bank versus Kakaso Sasane