Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Suraj Motors

DRT2 May 2024OA/1301/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 77.46 lakhs. The court decreed joint and several liability of borrowers and guarantors, awarded specific interest rates, permitted sale of mortgaged and personal assets, and ordered issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 77,46,628.00 with interest; injunction against disposing of assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S Suraj Motors — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TR!BUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No. - 1301 122

¶5

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

¶6

..... AppLicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Suraj Motors, 01 ) Through its Partnersi) Shri lmran Khan ii) Smt. Benaiffer Khan Regd./Administrative Office at-Ptot No.-3, Near Mitsubishi 5 & R Cars Pvt. Ltd., Latghati Chouraha, Bhopat (M.P.) 462001

¶9

Shri lmran Khan, S/o Mohammad Sharif Khan

¶10

Smt. Benaiffer Khan, W/o Shri lmran Khan

¶11

Miss Aisha Khan, D/o Mohammad Sharif Khan

¶12

(2 to 3 at Bungtow No.-1, Suraj Patace, Aditya Avenue, Vittage-Shingar Choti, Airport Road, Latghati, Bhopat, M.P.462001 )

¶13

Defendants

¶14

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Jagbandan Patel, Advocate

¶15

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

(Dated : O2nd May,2O24l

¶18

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 20110/22 against the Defendants for recovery ol Rs. 77,46,628.00 (Rupees Seventy Seven Lac, Fourty Six Thousand, Six Hundred and Twenty Eight onty) along with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶19

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its Partners Defendant No.-2 and then Partner Defendant No.-4, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit (Hypothecation)

¶20

¶21

oA 1301122

¶22

Limit of Rs. 45 Lac and Term Loan of Rs. 51 Lac aggregating Rs. 96 Lac on 01 /09/16 which were renewed on 24106/19. On the further request of Defendant No.-1 through Defendant No.-2 &.3, the Appticant-Bank sanctioned / renewed cash credit Limit of Rs.45 Lac, Term Loan of Rs.51 Lac, Guaranteed Emergency Credit Line (GECL) of Rs. 14 Lac and Funded lnterest Term Loan (FITL) of Rs.0.90 Lac on 01 /06/20 and these credit facilities were lastty sanctioned / renewed as Cash Credit (Hypothecation) Limit of Rs.45 Lac, reduced Term Loan to Rs.24 Lac, enhanced Funded lnterest Term Loan (FlfL) to Rs. 1 Lac and renewed Guaranteed Emergency Credit Line (GECL) facitity of Rs. 14 Lac on 08/06/21. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facitities the Defendant No.-1 through its then Partners as borrower and Defendant No.-2 to 4 in their individuat capacity as guarantors in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have also created equitabte mortgage over the immovable properties, i.e.,

¶23

i) Commercial Ptot No. F-05, Khasra No.-9l3 /1 and 913/2, Suraj City, Vittage-Bhouri, Patwari Hatka No.-26134, Ward No.-03, Tehsit-Huzur, Block-Phanda, admeasuring 1400 sq.ft.; belonging to Defendant No.-1; ii) Commercial Ptot No. F-09 and F-10, Khasra No.-9l3/1 and 913/2, Suraj City, Vittage-Bhouri, Patwari Hatka No.-26134, Ward No.-03, Tehsit-Huzur, Btock-Phanda, admeasuring 2800 sq,ft.; betonging to Defendant No.-4;

¶24

iii) Commercial Ptot No. F-07 and F-08, Khasra No.-9l3/'l and 9/312, Suraj City, Vittage-Bhouri, Patwari Hatka No.-26l34, Ward No.-03, Tehsi[-Huzur, Btock-Phanda, admeasuring 2800 sq.ft.; betonging to Defendant No.-1.

¶25

The Defendant No.-4 took retirement as partner from the Defendant No.-1 firm who was replaced by Defendant No.-3 as new partner and the copy of Partnership Letter is dated 18/04/19 and newty constituted Partnership Deed is daled 05/12117. The Defendant No.-1 through its Partners avaited the credit facitities and also executed Revival Letter on 04111 l'19. The accounts were ctassified as NPA and the Defendants failed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Legal Notice on 21/09/22 and initiation of action under the Securitisation Act by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has relied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-20 which were proved by Shri Veerendra Kumar Sharma, Chief Manager.

¶26

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared^nor fited written statement. They were^{proceededex-partevide order dated}

¶27

¶28

oA 1301122

¶29

19/06/23. 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 liable to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its application has ctaimed interest at contractual rate. However, I feel it fair and reasonable to grant interest @8.15%^p.a. in Cash Credit & Term Loan accounts, interest @7.40% p.a. in FITL &, GECL accounts simpte pendentetite and future titl reatization of the dues. The mortgaged properties are liabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶30

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

¶31

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatly Rs.77,46,628.00 (Rupees Seventy Seven Lac, Fourty Six Thousand, Six Hundred and Twenty Eight onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @8.15% p.a. in Cash Credit & Term Loan accounts, interest @7.40yo p.a. in FITL & GECL accounts simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,70/10127, with costs ti[[ its reatization.

¶32

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 depteting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way dealing with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶33

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

¶34

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 02nd Day of May, 2024.

¶35

,9' (Ram Niwas Patel) Presidinq Officer

State Bank of India v. M/S Suraj Motors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Suraj Motors

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 Dilip Singh

Smt Gosiya Sheikh versus The Authorized Officer India Shelter Fnance Corporation Limited

Ms Malwa Land Trading versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Yogesh Dhamode S/O Khaliram Dhamode

Hdfc Bank versus Krishn Kumar Lodhi S/O Bahadur Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Jamna Prashad s/o Arjun Lal