Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/S Maya Printers and Others

DRT14 Feb 2024OA/1856/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs.4.60 crores plus interest against defaulting borrowers and their guarantors. The court adjusted the claimed interest rate to 7.80%p.a. based on market conditions and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs.4.60 crores with costs and simple interest at 7.80%p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Indian Bank versus M/S Maya Printers and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1856/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.11.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 14.02.2024
Indian Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970,
having its Head Office at 254-260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai,
Royapettah, Chennai, having its Zonal Office at Ludhiana and amongst
other places a Branch at Kalsi Nagar, G.T. Road, Dada Motors,
Dholewal Chowk, Ludhiana-141003 through Sh. Daya Shankar,
Assistant General Manager duly constituted Power of Attorney holder of the bank and Principal Officer ……..Applicant Versus
1. M/s Maya Printers having its Registered Office at Pakhowal Road, Opposite Marble Market, Dad Village, Ludhiana-141003, through its partners (Borrower)
2. Sh. Sushil Guleria S/o Late Sh. Duryodhan Singh, R/o 59, Partap Colony, Model Gram, Ludhiana-141002 (Partner of Defendant No.1)
3. Smt. Shashi Kanta W/o Late Sh. Duryodhan Singh, R/o 59, Partap Colony, Model Gram, Ludhiana-141002 (Partner of Defendant No.1)
4. Mrs. Shilpa Guleria W/o Sh. Sushil Guleria, R/o 59, Partap Colony, Model Gram, Ludhiana-141002 (Guarantor) ………Defendants
Advocates: Argued by Ms. Manjari Joshi, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶6

¶7

FINAL ORDER

¶8

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.4,60,85,439.04p (Rupees Four Crores Sixty Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine and Four Paisa only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Daya Shankar, Assistant General Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 31.12.2014, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶9

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant No.1 through its partners i.e. defendant Nos.2 and 3 had approached the applicant bank for the takeover of credit facility from State Bank of Hyderabad and requested to grant OCC Limit of Rs.300.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 13.03.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶10

Later, the defendant no.1 through its partners i.e. defendant Nos.2 and 3 requested the applicant bank to restructure the OCC loan by carving out an FITL of Rs.46.00 lacs being the overdues in OCC Limit vide Letter of request for restructuring of loan account dated 06.12.2019, which is Annexure A13 to this OA.

¶11

The applicant Bank after considering the request for takeover of credit facility from State Bank of Hyderabad; sanctioned the OCC Limit of Rs.290.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 17.05.2017, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶12

Later, on request of the borrower, the applicant bank restructured the OCC loan by carving out a fresh FITL of Rs.45.80 lacs being the overdues in OCC Limit vide Sanction letter dated 13.12.2019, which is Annexure A14 to this OA. 4. Defendant Nos.2 and 3 had mortgaged their immovable properties detailed as: -

¶13

¶14

a) Equitable mortgage of factory land and building measuring 1893 Sq. Yards situated at Opposite Marble Market, Pakhowal Road, Village Daad, Ludhiana; owned by defendant Nos.2 and 3 vide Registered Gift Deed bearing Vasika N o.12238 dated 18.03.2010 along with its translation, which are Annexures A9 and A9-T to this OA; and

¶15

b) Equitable mortgage of land and building measuring 166 Sq. Yards situated at Opposite Marble Market, Pakhowal Road, Village Daad, Ludhiana; owned by defendant No.2 vide Registered Transfer Deed bearing Vasika No.7184 dated 28.10.2013 along with its translation, which are Annexures A10 and A10-T to this OA.

¶16

Documents executed:- Gazette Notification dated 04.03.2020, which is Annexure A1-A to this OA; Form A dated 04.02.2013, which is Annexure A1-B to this OA; Partnership letter dated 17.05.2017, which is Annexure A2-A to this OA; D.P. note, Agreement of hypothecation, Agreement for open cash credit, Letter from the borrower for disclosure of information, Guarantor’s form and Agreement of guarantee all dated 17.05.2017, which are Annexures A4 to A8 to this OA; Letter of acknowledgment to be signed by third party who has deposited the title deeds dated 19.05.2017, which are Annexures A11 and A12 to this OA; Partnership Letter, Letter acknowledging terms and conditions, D.P. note, Medium term loan agreement, Letters of undertaking-cum-declaration, Letter of undertaking, Covering letter for loans, Agreement of hypothecation, Funded interest term loan agreement and Agreement of guarantee all dated 13.12.2019, which are Annexures A15 to A23, A23-A and A24 to this OA; Letter from third party to bank for extension of equitable mortgage dated 19.12.2019, which are Annexures A25 and A26 to this OA; Register of equitable mortgage dated 18.05.2017, which are Annexures A27 and A28 to this OA; CERSAI Registration

¶17

¶18

dated 02.06.2017, which is Annexure A29 to this OA; Acknowledgment of debt dated 20.04.2020, which is Annexure A30 to this OA; Statements of accounts along with certificate under the Banker’s Book of Evidence Act, which are Annexures A31 and A32 to this OA; Demand notice dated 03.08.2020, which is Annexure A33 to this OA; Possession notice dated 21.10.2020, which is Annexure A34 to this OA and Recall notice dated 27.06.2022, which is Annexure A35 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.4,60,85,439.04p, 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 20.05.2023. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Daya Shankar, Assistant General Manager, Indian Bank has been filed. 8. 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 A35 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 executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, 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

¶19

¶20

Rs.4,60,85,439.04p (Rupees Four Crores Sixty Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine and Four Paisa only) along with interest from the present defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶21

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @11.05%p.a. in the OCC Limit and @7.80%p.a. in the FITL account along with @2%p.a. penal interest with monthly rests, in both, from 20.10.2022 till the realization.

¶22

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 @7.80%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.4,60,85,439.04p (Rupees Four Crores Sixty Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine and Four Paisa only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @7.80%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 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

¶23

¶24

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. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 04.03.2024. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal. Dated: 14.02.2024

¶25

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Indian Bank v. M/S Maya Printers and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/S Maya Printers 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

Indian Bank versus Sh. Surinder Singh and Another

Bank of India versus Sh. Nirmal Singh and Another

Indian Bank versus Smt. Jaswant Kaur and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/S Viney Knitwear Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Icici Bank Ltd. versus M/S Kay Em Kay Industries and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Gurpyair Singh and Others