Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Raman Gupta and Bros and Others

DRT1 Aug 2024OA/1558/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by HDFC Bank for the recovery of an outstanding loan of Rs 32.62 lakhs from the borrower-partnership firm and guarantors proceeeding ex-parte. The Tribunal sanctioned recovery including costs and uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 18%.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs 32,62,108.89 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date until realization; issuance of recovery certificate.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Raman Gupta and Bros and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1558/2022 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.05.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 01.08.2024

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., a banking company, incorporated under Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai 400013, Maharashtra and one of its branch at Chaunda Road, Amargarh, Malerkotla, Punjab through its authorized signatory Sh. Sunil Kalra, presently posted as Legal Manager at HDFC Bank Ltd., Department for Special Operations, HDFC bank house, Plot No. 28, 1^st Floor, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Raman Gupta & Bros., a partnership concern situated at Shop No, 4, Anaj Mandi, Amargarh, District Malerkotla through its Partners Sh. Rahul Singla and Sh. Chander Mohan (Borrower)

¶9

Sh. Rahul Singla S/o Sh. Krishan Kumar R/o Near Shiv Mandir, Amargarh, Malerkotla, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Chander Mohan S/o Sh. Sham Lal R/o Near Shiv Mandir, Amargarh, Malerkotla, Punjab

¶11

(Partners/Borrowers/Guarantors)

¶12

Smt. Parveen Singla W/o Sh. Chander Mohan R/o Near Shiv Mandir, Amargarh, Malerkotla, Punjab (Guarantor/Mortgagor)

¶13

………Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Sumit Batra, counsel for the applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex-parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial

¶18

¶19

Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.32,62,108.89p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Sixty Two Thousand One Hundred Eight and Paisa Eighty Nine only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sunil Kalra, Legal Manager o f the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application Board Resolution dated 16.10.2021, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant No.1 through its partner i.e. defendant nos.2 and 3 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of ODAP Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 23.12.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and further approached the applicant bank time to time for its Renewal dated 15.12.2014, 10.02.2016, 16.03.2017, 07.01.2019 and 04.02.2019, which are Annexures A12, A14, A16 and A21 to this OA. Later for the grant of GECL WCTL Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs.

¶21

The applicant Bank sanctioned the ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 27.02.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and further time to time renewed the ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 23.03.2015, 04.02.2019, 24.02.2016, 18.03.2017, 17.03.2018, 12.06.2020, which are Annexures A13, A15, A17, A20, A22 and A25 to this OA. Later sanctioned GECL WCTL of Rs.5.00 Lacs and renewed the ODAP Limit vide Sanction Letter dated 27.01.2021, which is Annexure A32 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶22

Defendant no.4 had equitable mortgage her immovable properties i.e. a property shop measuring 277.77 square yards situated at Shop no.4, Anaj Mandi, Near Malerkotla Road, Amargarh, Punjab -148022 vide Equitable Mortgage of Sale Deed bearing vasika no.308 dated 02.07.2010, along with its translation which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶23

Documents executed:- Letter of Authority by Partnership Firm, Master Facility Agreement (MFA), Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuity Security, Supplementary Letter of Guarantee all dated

¶24

¶25

30.01.2014, which are Annexures A4 to A8 to this OA; Certified copy of voult Register dated 08.02.2014, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Deed of Indemnity dated 30.01.2014, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Amendment Agreement, Demand Promissory note both dated 16.03.2017, which are Annexures A18 & A19 to this OA; Addendum, Letter both dated 18.02.2020, which are Annexures A23 & A24 to this OA; Declaration cum Undertaking, Undertaking, Facility-cumHypothecation Agreement, Letter of Authority, Supplementary Letter of Guarantee, memorandum of Mortgage all dated 25.06.2020, which are Annexures A26 to A31 to this OA; Recall notice dated 21.04.2022 with postal receipts, which is Annexure A33 to this OA and Account Statement (ODAP) & (GECL), Memorandum of Interest (ODAP) & (GECL) along with the Bankers Book Evidence Certificate, which are Annexures A34 to A37 to this OA.

¶26

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.32,62,108.89p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 09.07.2024.

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sunil Kalra, Legal Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed.

¶28

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel (through Video Conferencing) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A37 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had

¶29

¶30

executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, both the accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.32,62,108.89p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Sixty Two Thousand One Hundred Eight and Paisa Eighty Nine only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of both the accounts.

¶31

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @18.00%p.a. in ODAP and GECL in both, with monthly rests from 16.03.2022 till the realization.

¶32

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.32,62,108.89p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Sixty Two Thousand One Hundred Eight and Paisa Eighty Nine only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties

¶33

¶34

of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 22.08.2024.

¶36

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶37

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶38

Dated: 01.08.2024

¶39

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶40

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Raman Gupta and Bros and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Raman Gupta and Bros and Others

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

Icici Bank Ltd. versus J B Commission Agent

Icici Bank Limited versus Punjab Agro Implements Industries and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Ranjit Singh

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Lakshmi Traders and Others

Idbi Bank Limited versus Amanjot Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Paramjeet Singh and Others