Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh

DRT4 Jan 2024OA/2014/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicants Original Application for recovery of Rs. 98,65,223/- plus interest. The court granted simple interest at 10% per annum from the date of filing, directing issuance of a Recovery Certificate despite the absence of respondent representation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; defendants liable to pay Rs. 98,65,223/- with simple interest at 10% p.a. w.e.f. 04.11.2022.

State Bank of India versus M/S Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.2014/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.11.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 4^th DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

State Bank of India , a body corporate, constituted under the provisions of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having its Central Office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, one of its local Head Offices, Sector-17, Chandigarh and one of its Branches amongst

¶6

other places at Railway Road, Jind, through its Branch Manager, Sh. Manoj Kumar

¶7

…..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh, a Partnership Firm having its office at Village Brah-Khurd, Tehsil and District Jind, Haryana, through its partners

¶10

Sh. Krishan Kumar s/o Sh. Tek Chand, Partner, M/s Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh r/o House No. 1168, Urban Estate, District Jind, Haryana

¶11

Sh. Wazir Singh s/o Sh. Tek Chand, Partner, M/s Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh r/o House No. 1168, Urban Estate, District Jind, Haryana.

¶12

Sh. Tek Chand s/o Sh. Chhaju Ram r/o House No. 1168, Urban Estate, District Jind, Haryana

¶13

…..Defendants

¶14

Argued by: Sh. Sachin Sharma proxy counsel for Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 19.08.20223

¶15

OA/2014/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs M/S KRISHAN KUMAR WAZIR SINGH AND OTHERS 2

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendants for recovery of Rs.98,65,223/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Three Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Manoj Kumar, Branch Manager of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Gazette Notifications dated 27.03.1987 and 17.05.2001, Annexure-A1 (colly) (copy).

¶18

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that defendant Nos.2 to 4 had already availed of Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 20,00,000/- in their individual capacity and in the year 2014 defendant Nos.2 and 3 created a Partnership Firm in which defendant Nos. 2 and 3 were inducted as the Partners as well as mortgagors and defendant No.4 was the guarantor. Partnership deed dated 04.11.2014, is Annexure-A2 (copy). That defendant No.1 along with defendant No.2 approached the applicant bank for enhancement of Cash Credit Limit from Rs. 20,00,000/- to Rs. 80,00,000/- vide application Form dated 01.07.2014 for agriculture credit, Annexure-A3 (copy). Defendant No. 4 stood as a guarantor for repayment of the loan amount.

¶19

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facility to the defendants vide arrangement letter dated 03.11.2014, Annexure-

¶20

OA/2014/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs M/S KRISHAN KUMAR WAZIR SINGH AND OTHERS 3

¶21

A4 (copy), as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶22

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendants executed, hypothecation agreement dated 05.11.2014, Annexure-A5 (copy), deed of guarantee dated 05.11.2014, Annexure-A6 (copy) and partnership letter dated 05.11.2014, Annexure-A7 (copy).

¶23

The aforesaid loan facility was further secured by creation of equitable mortgage by defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in respect of agricultural land measuring 80 Kanal 17 Marla situated at revenue estate of Brah-Khurd, Tehsil and District, Jind, Haryana and equitable mortgage by defendant Nos. 2 and 3 in respect of commercial plot bearing booth No. 125 measuring 27.13 Square Yard situated at Diwan Khanna, Urban Estate, Jind, Haryana, fully detailed in Para Nos. 5(i) and 5(j)of the Original Application.

¶24

The documents relating to the mortgage are as under:

¶25

i. Registered mortgage deed dated 05.11.2014, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶26

ii. Letter dated 05.11.2014 to the Sub-Registrar, Jind, regarding mutation of the mortgaged property, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶27

iii. Copy of the ‘ Jamabandi’ for the year 2012-2013, AnnexureA10 .

¶28

iv. Deeds of conveyance dated 04.01.2011 of building/site sold by allotment/auction along with letters dated 16.01.2015 of allotment, Annexures-A11 and A12 (colly) (copy).

¶29

OA/2014/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs M/S KRISHAN KUMAR WAZIR SINGH AND OTHERS 4

¶30

v. Letters dated 08.11.2014 for confirmation for creation of mortgage by deposit of tile deeds, Annexure-A13 (colly) (copy).

¶31

vi. Search/Assets details of the mortgaged property on 13.10.2019, available on the Central Registry of Securitisation Asset Reconstruction and Security Interest of India, Annexure-A15 (copy).

¶32

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank leading to the loan account becoming irregular and it being classified as NPA on 26.03.2022. The defendants executed revival letters dated 10.10.2017 and 02.07.2022, Annexure-A14 (colly) (copy). The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 12.06.2020, Annexure-A16 (copy) and notice dated 21.04.2022 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Annexure-A17 (copy), but to no avail .

¶33

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.98,65,223/(Rupees Ninety Eight Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Three Only) , is recoverable against the defendants as per statement of account duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexure-A18 (copy).

¶34

Since the defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.

¶35

OA/2014/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs M/S KRISHAN KUMAR WAZIR SINGH AND OTHERS 5

¶36

Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants, thus, the defendants were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 19.08.2023 .

¶37

In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Manoj Kumar, Branch Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶38

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by the learned proxy counsel for the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶39

It was argued by the learned proxy counsel of the applicant bank that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendants for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A18 , it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them. It is further clear that the defendants had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.98,65,223/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Three Only) from the defendants.

¶40

OA/2014/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs M/S KRISHAN KUMAR WAZIR SINGH AND OTHERS 6

¶41

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, in relief clause the applicant bank has claimed rate of interest @12.25% per annum. In arrangement letter dated 03.11.2014, Annexure-A4 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @13% per annum.

¶42

This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogatives of mercy and magnanimity are the brightest jewels in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including the Pandemic Covid-19 affecting businesses, nature of the mortgaged property, purpose of loan, i.e. business, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @10% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶43

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs holding that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.98,65,223/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Three Only) with current and future simple interest @10% per annum w.e.f. 04.11.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joint as well as several. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property of the defendants in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

¶44

OA/2014/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs M/S KRISHAN KUMAR WAZIR SINGH AND OTHERS 7

¶45

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 or otherwise. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. However, the applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶46

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶47

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 26.02.2024 .

¶48

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendants through registered/speed post. This order be uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶49

Pronounced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. M/S Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Krishan Kumar Wazir Singh

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 Virgin Rubber Private Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Merrers Kavya Electricals

Idbi Bank versus Smt. Ruby Singh and Others

Syed Shamin Ahmad versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

United Bank of India versus M/S Tirhut Enterprises

United Bank of India versus M/s Khushi Polypack Private Limited