The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an origin al application ex-parte filed by UCO Bank against five defendants for recovery of a term loan debt of Rs 36,84,661.76 along with future interest since the defendants failed to appear.
Recovery of Rs 36,84,661.76 with future interest; issue of Recovery Certificate; bar on disposal of properties; thirty days to pay.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I
gEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III KOLKATA PRESENT: -SRI KAMALDE
PRESIDING OFFICER
O.A. No. 6 of 2022
DATE OF DELIVERY OF OROERI 16/04/2024
UCO Bank, a bodycorporale constltuledunderlhe Bankrng Companres (Acqu srtron and Transfer ofUndertakrngs)Act, 1970 having rts HeadOffice al 10, B TP1 Sa'anr' P.S. Hare Slreet, Kolkata700001 and carrying on banking bus ness nter-ala aL severalplaces ofInd a,ncludnq thepresentone at 219, Manckta a I{ainRoad' Kolkata-700054, commonlyknown as UCOBank, Bagmari Road Branch,herernaFter referred as lhe'Applicant Bank", wrth n the lursdrctron of th s Learned Trrbunal
APPI cant Bank
versus
Defendants
Counsel for the Appl canlBank:
Mr. Sacheran Ghosh, Advocates
Set ex'parle on 2a/o3/ 2024
]UDGEMENf
The Applicant Bank filed thepresentOA being No. O.A. 6 of 2022 on 4loll2o22forrecovery of a LotaL sum of Rs. 36,84,661.76l-(Rupees thrrtysix lakh eighty four thousand six hundred sixty one andpaise sevenly sx only) fromthe Defendants towards termloan together with interest,cost andother usual relreFs.
2
I
The defendants drdnol appear, as there was no The Defendants areservedwlth summons'
representation from thedefendants,the case was fixedfor ex-partehearrnqon 2AlO3/2024' and heard ex_ParteaccordingLY.
Heard the Ld. Counselfor the Applicant Bank'
entitled toLhecla m made in the OA agarnst the Defendanls Whether the APP|icantBank is prayed ror? and OA schedule Propertiesas
6 As slated s!pra,the Defendantremarnedabsentand did noL turnLlp Lo 'ontrovertthe versron of theO.A.of Appllcant Bank.The EvidenceAffidavrt coupled with the recrtalsn the .locuments viz., Exh bltAnnexure A to AnnexureG marked on behalfof the Applicanl Bank' establrshedthe clarmof the Applicant Bank agarnstlhe Defendantsand OA schedule propertres. Hence, I hold thattheDefendants are lointlyand severally liable lo payto lhe Applicant Bank the claimsmadeln the OA with futureinterest and costs'
In the result, thepresent OriginalApplicatronrs allowed ex parte with costs' as under:
ALDEB
Accordingly, the Original Applcanon being O.A. No. 6 of 2022 is allowed and slands drsposed of.
Copy of the ludgement/Final Order be upload n the Tflbunal's website. F le is consigned to the Record Room.
(o ctdte.l to stefo, transcr bed by her, .o(e.t-.d, sqned a.d Prono!..-.d by m-" . th-p open Colrt on tlr s r6i'dayorAprr,20?4)
-- ( TAMAL DE ) PRESI DING OFFICER
5om/
Debts RecoveryTribunal-3, Kolkata Order Sheet (Continuation)
Date of Order Order with signature
Orde. No / Order pronounced (vrde \pparate sheel5).
Dt.r6/04l20zq
In the result, O'A' No' 6 of 2022 ts allowed wrth co5ts.
lssue Recovery CerLlflcate accordingly'
I
( Kamal De )
Presiding Officer
DRT 3, Kolkata
I
lI _ll
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the debt claimed by the Applicant Bank is recoverable from the Defendants towards a term loan and interest.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
UCO Bank
Mr. Kundan Jaiswal
Mrs. Seema Jaiswal
Mr. Chandan Jaiswal
Mrs. Kanchan Jaiswal
Mrs. Bimla Devi Jaiswal
Kamal De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
