Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Messrs New Punjab Hardware Store and Others

DRT18 Oct 2024OA/23/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed a debt recovery application filed by Bank of Maharashtra against its borrowers. The court held the defendants liable for the outstanding dues and issued a recovery certificate, modifying the claimed interest rate to 8% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.27,69,871.00 with interest @08.00%p.a. from the defendants; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce claim through SARFAESI Act or attachment of personal assets.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Messrs New Punjab Hardware Store… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.23/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 26.12.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 18.10.2024

¶6

Bank of Maharashtra, a body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head Office at ‘Lokmangal’ 1501, Shivaji Nagar, Pune 411005 and one of its branch office situated at Link Road, Ludhiana, Punjab being represented through its Chief Manager (Assest Recovery Branch) Ms. Yangchan Dolma.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

M/s New Punjab Hardware Store (Through its Proprietor Sh. Ajit Pal Singh), Plot No. B-XVI-786, Street No.-1, Muradpura, Gill Road, Ludhiana, Punjab-141003

¶9

Sh. Ajit Pal Singh S/o Sh. Kulwant Singh, Resident of House No.1190/1-D, Harnam Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab-141001.

¶10

Smt. Parmeet Kaur W/o Sh. Ajit Pal Singh, Resident of House No.1190/1-D, Harnam Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab-141001.

¶11

………. Defendants

¶12

Advocates: Argued by Sh. Munish Yadav, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.27,69,871.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Sixty Nine Thousands Eight Hundred Seventy One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Yangchan Dolma, Chief Manager o f the applicant,

¶15

¶16

who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 22.03.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor i.e. defendant no.2 was already availing CC Limit of Rs.23.00 Lacs and had again approached the applicant for Renewal Cum Reduction of CC Limit to Rs.20.00 Lacs. Further, defendant no.1 (through its proprietor) had again approached the applicant for Term Loan (GECL) of Rs.4.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 11.05.2020, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Later, defendant no.1 (through its proprietor) had again approached the applicant for Restructuring CC Limit by reducing CC limit to Rs.10.00 and grant of fresh WCTL Loan of Rs.10.54 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 30.03.2021, which is Annexure A13 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the renewal cum reduction the CC Limit to Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 19.06.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Further, applicant bank sanctioned for Term Loan (GECL) of Rs.4.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 12.06.2020, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Later, the applicant sanctioned Restructuring CC Limit by reducing CC limit to Rs.10.00 and grant of fresh WCTL Loan of Rs.10.54 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 30.03.2021, which is Annexure A14 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

Defendant No.2 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. property no. B-16/786/52/1474/2(Old) and No. B/16-1474/2(New) measuring 55-1/3 Sq. Yards situated at Muhalla Muradpura, Ludhiana vide Equitable mortgage of Sale Deed bearing v asika No.9986 dated 21.09.2010 filed in compliance of order dated 18.09.2024 vide diary no.16245 dated 14.10.2024 a long with its translation to this OA. Documents executed:- Request Letter, D.P. Note, Letter of Proprietorship, Deed of Hypothecation, Guarantee Deed & Power of Attorney all dated 12.06.2020, which are Annexures A5 to A10 to

¶20

¶21

this OA; Mortgagor’s Declaration for proposed equitable mortgage dated 01.07.2020, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Mortgagor’s Letter of confirmation of equitable mortgage dated 04.07.2020, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Request Letters, D.P. Note, Deed of Hypothecation, Letter of Proprietorship, Guarantee Deed & Mortgagor’s Declaration for proposed equitable mortgage all dated 30.03.2021, which are Annexure A15 to A24 to this OA; Mortgagor’s Letter of confirmation of equitable mortgage dated 31.03.2021, which is Annexure A25 to this OA; Balance & Security Confirmation Letters dated 08.06.2021, which are Annexures A26 & A27 to this OA; Account Statement and Unapplied interest certificate along with Certificate under Banker’s Book Evidence Act, which are Annexures A28 and A29 to this OA.

¶22

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.27,69,871.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant 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 12.08.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Yangchan Dolma, Chief Manager, Bank of Maharashtra h as been filed. 8. Heard 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 had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A29 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the

¶23

¶24

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 is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.27,69,871.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Sixty Nine Thousands Eight Hundred Seventy One Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶25

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.34%p.a. from 16.12.2023 till the realization.

¶26

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 loans 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 @08.00%p.a. in 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.27,69,871.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Sixty Nine Thousands Eight Hundred Seventy One Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant 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

¶27

¶28

SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the 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. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 29.10.2024. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant 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 .

¶29

Dated: 18.10.2024

¶30

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

Bank of Maharashtra v. Messrs New Punjab Hardware Store and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Messrs New Punjab Hardware Store 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

Union Bank of India versus Inderjit Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Rajinder Singh and Another

Bank of India versus Harjinder Kaur and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Messrs Bharti Ajay and Associates and Others

Uco Bank versus Labh Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Rohit Goyal and Another