Allowed

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Sarika Ranjeet Jadhav

DRT8 Oct 2024OA/147/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the asset reconstruction company's application for recovery of outstanding dues. The court deducted penal interest and reduced future interest to 9% p.a., directing respondents to pay the adjusted sum with interest and authorizing the sale of secured assets.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to pay Rs.72,72,267/- with future interest at 9% p.a. from date of filing; mortgaged property/vehicle secured; authority to sell assets and issue Recovery Certificate.

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited versus… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 18.11.2021 Registered on : 23.02.2022 Decided on : 08.10.2024 Duration : Y M D 02 10 20

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 147/2022.

¶3

Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited ,

¶4

A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and registered as an Asset Reconstruction Company pursuant to Section 3 of the SARFAESI Act, 2022 having its registered office at Caddie Commercial Tower, Regus Business Centre, 5^th Floor, Aerocity (Dial), New Delhi 110037 and its Corporate office at 5^th Floor, Plot 137, Sector 44, Gurgaon, Haryana 122002.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mrs. Sarika Ranjit Jadhav

¶8

Mr. Pratibha Vilas Jadhav

¶9

Mr. Ranjit Vilas Jadhav

¶10

All R/o : 22/104, Ganesh Nagar, Lane No.9, Shahapur Road, Ichalkaranji, Taluka Hatkanangale, District Kolhapur- 416 115.

.. Defendants

(OA No.147/2022)

Page 1 of 7

ANIL

APPEARANCES

For Applicant	Advocate - Sudha Koloti.
For Defendants	Advocate - Ghate.

¶17

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.75,88,904/-

¶18

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 8^th October, 2024)

¶19

The Applicant Company has filed the present application for recovery of the aggregate sum of Rs.75,88,904/(i.e. Rs.8,15,505/- for Car Term Loan and Rs.67,73,399/- for Flexi Term Loan) together with future interest @10.45%% per annum and @14.00% p.a. respectively with monthly rests and penal interest @2% p.a. from 25.08.2021 till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶21

Defendant No.1 and 2 are co-borrowers and Defendant No.3 is guarantor to the credit facilities granted by the Assignor Bank to Defendant Nos.1 and 2. Defendant No.1 approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for credit facility for purchase of Honda Mobilio (o). The Assignor Bank accepted the request of Defendant No.1 and sanctioned Car Loan of Rs.10,00,000/- on 06.11.2015 on certain terms and conditions mentioned in Para No.5.8 of the Original Application.

(OA No.147/2022)

Page 2 of 7

ANIL

To secure the said Car Loan facility, Defendant No.1 and 2 executed certain documents in favour of the Assignor Bank as mentioned in Para No.5.9 of the Original Application. Defendants also executed Composite Deed of Hypothecation & thereby hypothecated Car i.e. Honda Mobilio (o) having RTO Registration No. MH-09-AG-8055, Chassis No. MAKDD57ADN002266 & Engine No. N15A11323750.

¶26

The Applicant further contended that Defendant No.1 and 2 again approached the Assignor Bank in the year 2018 for Flexi Term Loan of Rs.44,00,000/-. The Assignor Bank considered the request of Defendants and sanctioned Flexi Term Loan of Rs.44,00,000/- on certain terms and conditions.

¶27

To secure the above Flexi Term Loan of Rs.44,00,000/-, Defendant Nos.1 to 3 executed certain documents in favour of Assignor Bank as set out in Para No.5.16 in the Original Application. So also, the Defendant No.1 created Equitable Mortgage by deposit of Title Deeds on 31.03.2018 and thereby mortgaged the property i.e. all that piece and parcel of property admeasuring about 242.50 sq. mtrs an open plot bearing C.S.No.22125 situated at Shahapur, within the Municipal Area of Ichalkaranji, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.18 of

(OA No.147/2022)

Page 3 of 7

ANIL

the Original Application. So also, Defendant Nos.1 and 2 deposited Title Deeds in respect of the property i.e. Gift Deed dated 28.03.2018 executed by Defendant No.3 in favour of Defendant No.1, which is duly registered in the Office of Sub Registrar Ichalkaranji at Sr.No.1411/2018 dated 28.03.2018.

¶32

The Applicant further contended that initially Defendant No.1 was making payments regularly, thereafter, defendants were not making payments as per the terms of agreement and violated terms of agreement and failed to repay the loans.

¶33

The applicant Company contended that the defendants were called upon to repay the credit facilities; however, defendant No.1 did not pay any heed. Therefore, on 06.10.2020, the applicant Company issued Demand Notice to the defendants and thereby recalled the credit facilities sanctioned to Defendant No.1 and invoked the guarantee to Defendant No.2 and 3. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Company.

¶34

Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.147/2022)

Page 4 of 7

ANIL

The Defendants were duly served with the summons. The defendants appeared and filed Written Statement (Exhibit-10) and contested the Application.

¶39

The Applicant Company has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Virendra Ghanwat, Authorized Officer and Manager of the Applicant Company, and has produced on record the photocopies/original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-30 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Company.

¶40

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the Applicant Company.

¶41

It is pertinent to note that though the defendants filed the Written Statement denying all the contentions of the applicant Company in toto, but the defendants have failed to lead evidence. Therefore, contentions raised in the Written Statement (Exhibit-10) are devoid of consideration as observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Iswar Bhai C. Patel alias Bachu Bhai Patel Vs. Harihar Behara and Anr. reported in AIR 1999 SC 1341 in respect of non-filing of the evidence affidavit. I, therefore, hold that the evidence of the applicant Company in the form of Claim Affidavit and

(OA No.147/2022)

Page 5 of 7

ANIL

documentary evidence produced on record is conceivable and I find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Applicant Company. Therefore, the Applicant Company is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶46

The Applicant Company has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.35,731/-, For Car Term Loan and Rs.2,80,906/- for Flexi Term Loan Account, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.75,88,904/- is reduced to Rs. 72,72,267 /-.

¶47

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @10.45%% p. a. for Car Loan and @14.00% p.a for Flexi Term Loan with monthly rests. 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.

¶48

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(A) Original Application No.147/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶51

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the Applicant Company the sum of Rs.72,72,267/- (Rupees Seventy Two Lakhs Seventy Two Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Seven only)

(OA No.147/2022)

Page 6 of 7

ANIL

along with future interest @9.00% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 18.11.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶56

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of property i.e. all that piece and parcel of property admeasuring about 242.50 sq. mtrs. an open plot bearing C.S.No.22125 situated at Shahapur, within the Municipal Area of Ichalkaranji, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.18 of the Original Application.

¶57

(D) The Aforesaid adjudicated amount is also secured by Deed of Hypothecation dated 07.11.2015 of the vehicle i.e. Honda Mobilio (O) having RTO Registration No.MH-09-AG-8055, Chassis No. MAKDD57ADN002266 & Engine No.N15A11323750.

¶58

(E) The Applicant Company is entitled to sell the above mentioned mortgaged property & hypothecated vehicle, to recover its dues.

¶59

(F) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶60

(G) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the Applicant and Defendants.

¶61

Place : Pune Date : 08.10.2024

¶62

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶63

(OA No.147/2022)

¶64

Page 7 of 7

¶65

ANIL

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Sarika Ranjeet Jadhav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Sarika Ranjeet Jadhav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Sakharam

Canara Bank versus Subhash

Bank of Maharashtra versus Dilip Jagtap

Bank of India versus Madhukar Mulik

Bank of India versus Shivaji Mulik

Canara Bank versus M/S. Kiran Tours & Travels Prop. Mr. Kiran Sadashiv Adsul