Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mahesh Kumar Bhagchandani

DRT4 Oct 2024OA/263/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of an outstanding housing loan amount of approximately Rs. 60 lakh, along with interest and costs, against the borrowers and guarantor who failed to appear.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs. 59,97,727.41 with interest from the date of filing; permission to realize dues from mortgaged and personal properties; issuance of recovery certificate under Section 19(7).

Union Bank of India versus Mahesh Kumar Bhagchandani — Specific Performance | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'bte Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶4

Originol Applicotion No. - 263122

¶5

Union Bank of lndia, SSI Branch, UG-01, Western Business Centre, 1/6, New Patasia, lndore, M.P.

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Mahesh Kumar Bhagchandani, S/o Srichand Bhagchandani

¶9

1. Parmeshwari Devi, W/o Srichand Bhagchandani

¶10

1. Harish Kumar Bhagchandani, S/o Srichand Bhagchandani

¶11

1. RoshniBhagchandani, W/o Harshish Kumar Bhagchandani

¶12

(Att R/o 81, Sarvodaya Nagar, lndore, M.P.)

¶13

Defendants

¶14

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Shreyas Dubey, Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(oateal oan octouer; zoza)

¶17

The Appticant-Bank has fited the^present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on^{14/02122against the} Defendants for recovery of Rs. 59,97,727.41^(Rupees F'ifty Nine^{Lac, Ninety} Seven Thousand, Seven Hundred Twenty Seven and^{Paisa Fourty One onty)} atong with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that on the request^of Defendant No.-1 to 3, the Appticant Bank^(erstwhile Corporation^Bank) sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs. 65 Lac and in consideration^{of the same the} Defendant No.-l to 3 as borrowers and Defendant No.-4 as^guarantorin ' addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have atso created equitabte mortgage over the immovabte^property, i.e., Al[ that^pieceand parcel of House No.-81 Sarvodaya Nagar, lndore, admeasuring 1650 sq.ft.; betonging to Defendant No.-1 to 3. The Defendants avaited the credit facilities but faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues^{despite issuance of}

¶19

¶20

oA263t22

¶21

Recatt Notice by the Appticant^{Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied uponthe} documents at Ex. A-1 to^{A-9 which wereproved by shri Manir Ansari,chief} Manager.

¶22

Despite service of notice,^{the Defendants neitherappeared nor} fited written statement. They^{wereproceededex-Parte vide order dated} 03/08/23. There is therefore,^{no reasonto disbelievethe contentionsof the} Bank. Considering the^{facts of the case,I opine that the Defendantsare} jointty and severally tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together^{with interest} and costs. The Appticant'Bank^{in its application has ctaimedinterest} @10.50%^{p.a. with monthty rests. However, I feel it fair and reasonabteto} grant interest @10.50% p.a. simpte^{pendentelite and future ti[[ reatizationof} the dues. The mortgaged^{propertyis tiabte to be sotd for recovery of} amount due atong with the^{personalpropertiesand assets of the Defendants.}

¶23

The Originat Apptication is attowed^{and it is orderedas under-} i) The Defendants do^{pay jointlyand severatly Rs. 59,97'727.41} (Rupees Fifty Nine Lac, Ninety Seven Thousand,^{SevenHundred Twenty} Seven and Paisa Fourty One^{onty) together with pendentetite and future} interest @10.50% per annum simple^{from the dateof fiting of the 0A, i.e.,} 14102127, with costs ti[[ its realization.

¶24

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted^{to sett the mortgagedas wetlas} personal properties and assets of the Defendants^{for realizationof its dues.} The Defendants are hereby restrained^{by means of injunctionfrom} depteting, transferring, encumbering,^{atienatingor in anyway deating with} their^{properties/assets} without^{first paying the claim of the AppticantBank.}

¶25

iii) A Recovery Certificate^{be issued uls 19(72)of Recoveryof} Debts and Bankruptcy^{Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost} within 7 days for^{preparingRecoveryCertificate'}

¶26

Judgment^{pronouncedin the open court on this 04th Day of October,2024'}

¶27

r)y
yo
^
( Ni s Patet)
Presidin e Officer

Union Bank of India v. Mahesh Kumar Bhagchandani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mahesh Kumar Bhagchandani

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

Bank of India versus Satyendra Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Rajneesh Kumar

Hdfc Bank versus Afzal Mansuri

Bank of Baroda versus dhiraj

Bank of Baroda versus Mohanlal

Narendra Kumar Tharwani versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited