Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Gurunanak Industries

DRT7 May 2024OA/1191/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application filed under the Securitisation and Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Acts. The tribunal directed respondents to pay the claimed amount with interest and permitted recovery through the sale of mortgaged and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to jointly and severally pay Rs. 21,40,920.33 with interest at 10% p.a. (cash credit) and 7.45% p.a. (WCTL) from 04/10/2022; Recovery Certificate issued; Injunction granted.

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Gurunanak Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Originol Applicotion No. - 1 191 122

¶5

HDFC Bank Limited, Savitri, GCF Road, CiviI Lines, Jabatpur^(M.P.)

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Gurunank lndustries, Through its ProprietorMr. AniI Kumar Asrani, Robert Line, Madhav Nagar, Katni (M.P.)483501; Atso at: Sant Kanwar Ram Ward No.'43, Khaiwar Line, Madhav Nagar, Mundwara, Katni, M.P. 483504

¶9

Mr. Ani[ Kumar Asrani, 5/o Shri Tanumal Asrani

¶10

Mrs. Mamta Devt, W/o Mr. Ani[ Kumar Asrani

¶11

Mr. Sunil Kumar Asrani, S/o Shri Tanumal Asrani

¶12

(2 to 4 R/o lndira Gandhi Ward, Near Kaitwara Raitway Fatak, PH No.-4512, New 43, S.N.-493, Part of Khasra No.-16011, Katni, M.P. 483501 ; Atso at: Sant Kanwar Ram Ward No.-43, Khaiwar Line, Madhav Nagar,

¶13

Mundwara, Katni, M.P. 483504)

¶14

Defendants

¶15

Counset for the Appticant :^{Shri Sanjeev Dubey, Advocate} Defendants : Ex-Parte

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

(Dated: OTtn MaY,2024\

¶18

The Appticant-Bank has^{fited the present OriginalApptication} u/s 19 of Recovery of^{DebtsandBankruptcyAct on 04110122against the} Defendants for recovery of^{Rs. 21,40,920.33 (Rupees TwentyOne Lac, Fourty} Thousand, Nine Hundred^{Twenty and Paisa ThirtyThree only)atongwith} interest and other retiefs^{as stated.}

¶19

¶20

oA |9U22

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-'l through its Proprietor Defendant No.-2, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 20 Lac on 08/ 11 / 13 BG facitity of Rs. 15 Lac on 25/04/ 14 and GECL-WCTL of Rs. 3.48 Lac and the credit facitities were renewed lastly on'15/12120. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facility the Defendant No.-l & 2 as borrower and Defendant No.-3 & 4 as guarantors in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have atso created equitabte mortgage over the immovable property, i.e., Property situated at lndira Gandhi Ward, Near Kaitwara Raitway Fatak, P.H. No.-4512, New 43, S.N.-493, Part of Khasra No.-160/'l , Katni, M.P. 483501 , area 0.118 hectare (12000 sq.ft.) after purchase land diverted for residential purpose, betonging to Defendant No.-2 and 4. The Defendant No.-1 through its Proprietor availed the credit facilities and also executed Letter of Acknowtedgment of Debts on 01 /02/70. The BG avaited by the Defendants has been ctosed. The other accounts were ctassified as NPA and the Defendants faited to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Demand Notice dated 19/09122 under the Securitisation Act by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex A-1 to A-41 which were proved by Shri Ashish Rawat, Manager.

¶22

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 16/01 123, 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 Applicant-Bank in its application has claimed interest at contractual rate but has not specified the rate of interest appticabte for different loan accounts. However, I feel it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @10% p.a. in cash credit account and7.45Yo p.a. in WCTL account simpte pendentelite and future till realization of the dues. The mortgaged property is liabte to be sold for recovery of amount due atong with the personat properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶23

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

¶24

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severalty Rs. 21,40,920.33 (Rupees Twenty One Lac, Fourty Thousand, Nine Hundred Twenty and Paisa Thirty Three onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @10% p.a.

¶25

¶26

oA 1t91122

¶27

in cash credit account and7.45% p.a. in WCTL account simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,04/10/22, with costs ti[[ its reatization.

¶28

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the mortgaged as wetl 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, encumbering, atienating or in any way dealing^with their properties/assets without first paying the claim of the Appticant Bank.

¶29

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶30

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 07th Day of May, 2024.

¶31

9 (Ram Niwas Patet) Presidine Off icer

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Gurunanak Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Gurunanak Industries

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

Shei Deepak versus Vastu Housing Finance Croporation Ltd.

1.Ramlal Chhogmal versus Hdfc Bank

Idbi Bank versus M/S Khemchand Balmukund and Sons

Hdfc Bank versus Ramababu

Canara Bank versus M/S Samarth Construction

Ms Ayush Traders versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)