Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sandu Khan Mumtaz Khan

DRT15 Mar 2024OA/126/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of dues of Rs. 39.72 lakh. The court held that the defendants' failure to appear resulted in an ex parte proceeding wherein the bank's claim, supported by documentary evidence, was accepted as unrebuted.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to jointly or severally pay Rs. 39,72,545.52 with future interest at 6% per annum; recovery certificate issued; order to proceed against mortgaged and other properties allowed.

Union Bank of India versus Sandu Khan Mumtaz Khan — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 24/02/2022 Registered on: 18/05/2022 Decided on: 15/03/2024 Duration: Y. M. Ds. 2 - 0 - 19

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, at Aurangabad

¶3

Original Application No. 126 of 2022

¶4

Total claim amount–Rs. 39,72,545.52 ps

¶5

Union Bank of India, Erstwhile Andhra Bank, amalgamated into Union Bank of India with effect from 1^st April 2020 in terms of Gazette of India No. GSR No. 154 € dated 4^th March 2020 issued by Ministry of Finance, Government of India, a body corporate and constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Central office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai – 400 021 and amongst other branches, one of the Branch Office at House No. 18, Randhir Building, Gurukrupa Housing Stadium Road, Shahnoorwadi Dargah, Garkheda, Aurangabad, through its Authorised Officer Shri Avinash Anand s/o Anil Kumar, age 33 years occup. service, working as Senior Manager, Union Bank of India, House No. 18, Randhir Building, Gurukrupa Housing Stadium Road, Shahnoorwadi Dargah, Garkheda, Aurangabad, IFSC Code : UBIN0807109

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶8

Page 1 of 7

¶9

Versus

¶10

Mr Sandu Khan Mumtaz Khan, Proprietor of M/s. Welcome Fabrication, age major occup. business R/o House No. 18, near Jali Wali Dargha, Kiradpura, Aurangabad – 431001 AND Plot No. 10 78 1, Kiradpura, Jali Wali Dargha, oppositge of Sana Hotel NR, Aurangabad AND Flat No. 5, (1^st floor), Mitmita, Square Plaza Wing Building No. 103, Aurangabad AND Flat No.7, (2^nd floor) Mitmita, Square Plaza Wing Building No. 103, Aurangabad Mobile No. 9823692222 PAN : DXWPK3022G

¶11

Mr Shaikh Azhar Shaikh Zafar, age major occup. business R/o Galli No. A1, Tahemaniya Colony, Aurangabad – 431001 PAN No. ACJPZ3819R …Defendants Mobile No. 9172968427 & 8554804446 Appearance : For the applicant-bank Mr. Atul A. Mishra, Adv. For Defendants : Absent.

¶12

Shri Vimal Gupta, Presiding Officer

¶13

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶14

Page 2 of 7

¶15

Pronounced on : 15^th March 2024

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This is an application under sub-section (1) of Section 19

¶18

of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of the dues in the sum of Rs. 39,72,545.52 ps. (Rs. thirty nine lakhs seventy two thousand five hundred forty five and ps. fifty two only) together with future interest thereon @ 11.5% with monthly rests the date of filing the Orig. Application till repayment/ realization. It is pleaded that defendant No.1/borrower & defendant No. 2 as guarantor, obtained Property Term Loan of Rs. 10,00,000/- to meet working capital SOD to traders (Abhivruddhi Scheme) and to support business in Covid-19 (under UEGCL 2020-2021) on 27/09/2018 agreeing to repay the loan amount by 120 EMIs of Rs. 13,917/- and interest thereon @ 11.25% p.a. with monthly rests; and again Deft. No.1 obtained Property Term Loan of Rs. 19,00,000/- for the same purpose on 28/09/2018 on the same terms and conditions, agreeing to repay it within two years alongwith interest thereon @# 11.5% p.a. with monthly rests; on execution of relevant documents in favour of applicant bank to secure the loan

¶19

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶20

Page 3 of 7

¶21

amounts and accepting terms and conditions as to repayment of both the loan amounts. It is pleaded that the defendants again obtained loan amount of Rs. 3,80,000/- on 02/07/2020 from the applicant bank under UGECL 2020-2021 scheme to support business in Covid 19, agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest thereon @ 7.50% p.a. with monthly rests. Bank pleads that however, the defendants failed to repay the loan amounts, as agreed inspite of repeated demands and consequently, it converted into NPA on 31/03/2021 and thereupon, it resulted into issuing demand notice U/S. 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 05/10/2021, however, both the defendants did not pay any response to it and failed to repay the loan amounts. It is pleaded that both the defendants in the meantime have executed letters of acknowledgment of debt on 29/05/2021 and 24/06/2021 and thereby acknowledged the liability to pay the loan amounts outstanding against them. It is pleaded that though the defendants granted sufficient time to repay the loan amounts, they failed to repay it. Hence this Orig. Application.

¶22

As per the Court Commissioner’s report Exh. 11 dated 03/01/2024, both defendants No.1 & 2 refused to accept the

¶23

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶24

Page 4 of 7

¶25

summons and therefore, the Court Commissioner pasted the summons on the conspicuous part of the house and also sent the summons on their respective mobile No.’s WhatsApp. Refusal to accept summons is deemed service. Thus, both the defendants though served with the summons, failed to appear in the matter and therefore, Orig. Application proceeded ex parte against them.

¶26

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶27

The point that arises for consideration is, whether the applicant-bank is entitled for the claim made in the Orig. Application against the defendant, as prayed for ?

¶28

The applicant bank has filed claim affidavit (Exhibit-4) of Mr. Avinash Anand s/o Anil Kumar, Senior Manager. The applicant bank also filed list of original documents (Exh.5) annexing therewith 22 documents to corroborate and prove its claim, as given in the Original Application, which are marked as Exh.A.W.1 to A.W. 22 on behalf of the applicant, which clinches the claim of the applicant-bank against both the defendants. Moreover, in view of absence of defendants in the matter, the averments in the Original Application have gone unrebutted, the

¶29

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶30

Page 5 of 7

¶31

Tribunal is of the opinion that the applicant-bank is entitled for the prayers made therein. Further more, perusal of the documents on record shows that the application is filed within the period of limitation. Hence I hold that both the defendants are liable to pay to applicant-bank the claimed amount in the Orig. Application with future reasonable interest considering meantime Covid-Pandeic-19 long period and costs. Hence the following order.

¶32

O R D E R

¶33

(A) Original Application No. 126 of 2022 is allowed with costs.

¶34

(B) Defendants No.1 & 2 are directed to pay jointly or severally to the applicant-bank the aggregate sum of Rs. 39,72,545.52 ps. (Rs. thirty nine lakhs seventy two thousand five hundred forty five and ps. fifty two only) with pendente lite and future interest @ 6 (six)% per annum, simple, from the date of filing Original Application till repayment/ realisation.

¶35

(C) Amount recovered, if any, by applicant-bank during pendency of the Orig. Appln. shall be reduced from such calculated amount before the Recovery Officer

¶36

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶37

Page 6 of 7

¶38

and demand notice shall be issued for balance amount.

¶39

(D) The applicant-bank is entitled to proceed against the and as mortgaged hypothecated properties, described in the Orig. Application towards realization of their dues;

¶40

(E) The applicant-bank is entitled to proceed against the person and properties of both the defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

(F) The applicant bank is entitled to the costs of the Original Application.

¶42

(G) The applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶43

(H) Issue recovery certificate.

¶44

(I) Communicate order to the parties concerned. Order be uploaded on the official website.

¶45

( Vimal Gupta ) PRESIDING OFFICER, Aurangabad, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, Date: 15/03/2024 Aurangabad

¶46

[Madkar) (O.A. No. 126/2022)

¶47

Page 7 of 7

Union Bank of India v. Sandu Khan Mumtaz Khan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sandu Khan Mumtaz Khan

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

State Bank of India versus M/S Jaikisan Krushi Kendra

State Bank of India versus Ashiwini Atul Gargade

Shivaji Abaji Parte versus Aspire Home Finance Corporation Limited

Manik Bhausaheb Menkudle versus Osmanabad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Sumlax Biocoals

M/S Anant Industries versus Canara Bank