Allowed

State Bank of India v. Shweta Rajawat

DRT17 May 2024OA/1056/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India against Smt. Shweta Rajawat for recovery of loan dues aggregating Rs. 28,90,172.00 with interest. The proceeding was conducted ex-parte as the defendant failed to respond.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 28,90,172.00 with interest and costs; recovery certificate to be issued; injunction imposed on defendant's assets.

State Bank of India versus Shweta Rajawat — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Originol Applicotion No. - 1056122

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 5, Yashwant Niwas Road, lndore (M.P.) 452003

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Shweta Rajawat, (D/o Shri Ashok Singh Rajawat) W/o Shri Latit Nagru, Proprietor-M/s Himaksh Events & Advertising, House No,-18, Scheme No.-78-Part ll, Vijay Nagar, lndore (M.P.) 452010; A[so at: 61 /9, Dubey Ka Bagicha, New Dewas Road, Near Rajkumar Bagicha, lndore (M.P.)452010

¶9

Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant : Shri Jagbandan^{Patel,Advocate}

Defendant

: Ex-parte

JUDGMENT

(Dated : 17rn MaY,2024)

¶15

The Appticant-Bank has fited the^{present Originat Apptication} u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy^{Act on 02109/22against the} Defendant for recovery of Rs. 28,90,172.00^{(Rupees Twenty Eight Lac,} Ninety Thousand, One Hundred and Seventy^{Two onty)atong with interest} and other reliefs as stated,

¶16

2, The brief facts of the case are that on the^{request of} Defendant, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Cash^{Credit HypothecationLimit} of Rs. 3.50 Lac and Term Loan of Rs,^{24 Lac aggregatingRs. 27.50 Lac on} 07t17/16 and the cash credit timit^{was subsequentlyconvertedto term loan} thereby enhancing the term Loan to^{Rs. 27.50 Lac. On the further request} of the Defendant the Appticant-Bank^{renewed the term loan of Rs. 18.25Lac} and sanctioned Emergency Credit Line^{Guarantee Scheme(GECL)of Rs. 3'60} Lac aggregating Rs.21 .85 Lac on^{09/06/20and the credit facilities were} subsequentty restructured as Term^{Loan of Rs. 20.46Lac and Working} Capitat Term Loan^(WCTL) of^Rs. 3'60^{Lac under (GECL) Schemeon} 25102121 .ln consideration of the sanction^{of credit facitities the Defendant}

¶17

)

¶18

oA 10s6t22

¶19

executed requisite loan documents and atso Revivat Letter on 21 /11/19.The Defendant avaited the credit facitities but fail,ed to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Legal Not.ice on 16/08/22 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has relied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-10 which were proved by Shri Virendra Kumar Sharma, Chief Manager.

¶20

Despite service of notice, the Defendant neither appeared nor filed written statement. She was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 03/02/23. There is therefore, no reason to disbelieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendant is tiabte to pay the claim amount together with interest and costs. The AppticantBank in its application has ctaimed contractual rate of interest without specifying the prevailing rate of interest. However, I feet it fair and reasonable to grant interest @7.507o p.a. simpte pendentetite and future titt realization of the dues. The personal properties and assets of the Defendants are liable to be sold for recovery of amount due.

¶21

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

¶22

i) The Defendant do pay Rs. 28,90,'t72.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lac, Ninety Thousand, One Hundred and Seventy Two onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @7.50y" per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,02/09/22, with costs titt its reatization.

¶23

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the personal properties and assets of the Defendant for realization of its dues. The Defendant is hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way deating with her properties/assets without first paying the claim of the Appticant Bank.

¶24

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

¶25

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this^.l7th Day of May, 2024.

¶26

.9 (Ram Niwas Patet) Presidine Officer

State Bank of India v. Shweta Rajawat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Shweta Rajawat

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

Hdfc Bank versus Ms K M Tyres

Smt Kusum Jagdishchandra Singh versus LIC Housing Finance Company limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus Kunal Goyal

Decent Choice versus Capri Global Limited

Bholeram Ahirwar versus Union Bank of India

Ms Halkulal Babulal Jain versus Canara Bank