Allowed

Bank of India v. Ms Bharti Mobile

DRT18 Jul 2024OA/270/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Bank of India against M/s. Bharti Mobile and Uma Prajapati for recovery of outstanding loan dues. The court directed joint and several payment of the claim amount with a modified interest rate and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 37,17,607.81 with interest; issuance of Recovery Certificate under Section 19(2) of the RDDB Act; injunction on disposal of assets.

Bank of India versus Ms Bharti Mobile — Consumer Protection | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

cAtAP COURT AT RATPUR (C.G.)

¶4

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

¶5

Original Application No. - 270/23

¶6

Bank of lndia, Power House Branch, District-Bhitai (C.G. )

¶7

..... Appticant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Bharti Mobite, Through its ProprietressSmt. Uma Prajapati, Shop No. 21-26, Himataya Comptex, Akash Ganga, Supeta, Bhitai, Distt.-Durg (C.G.)

¶10

Smt. Uma Prajapati, W/o Shri Gyannendra Prajapati, R/o Qtr. No.-6C, Street No.-9,

¶11

Sector-6, Bhitai, District-Durg (C.G.)

¶12

..... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : Shri Atok Mishra, Advocate

¶14

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Dated : 18th July, 2024)

¶17

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 24102/23 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 37,17,607.81 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lac, Seventeen Thousand, Six Hundred Seven and Paisa Eighty 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 through its Proprietress Defendant No.-2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit (Hypothecation) Limit of Rs. 10 Lac on 20103117 which was enhanced to Rs.25 lac on 23106/17, Demand/Term Loan of Rs. 2.50 Lac on 06/05/20 and Term Loan of Rs. 2 Lac on^17107120 and in consideration of the same the Defendants executed requisite^loan documents from time to time. The Defendants avaited the credit^facitities but fa'ited to liquidate the outstanding dues despite^issuance of^RecatINotice on 01 /09/71 and initiation of action under the Securitisation Act^{by the}

¶19

¶20

oA270123

¶21

Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex A-1 to A-37 which were^proved by Shri Sumit Sikdar, Chief Manager.

¶22

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 03111123. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointty and severatty tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has ctaimed interest @10.70%^p.a. in cash credit account,^interest @9.35%^{p.a. in term loan} account of Rs. 2.50 Lac and interest @9.25% p.a. in term loan account of^Rs. 2 lac with monthty rests. However, I feel it fair and reasonabte to^grant interest @10.70% p.a. in cash credit account and interest @9.25% for both the term loan accounts simpte pendentetite and future titt reatization of the dues. The personal properties and assets of the Defendants are tiabte to^be sotd for recovery of amount due.

¶23

The Originat Apptication is attowed and it is ordered as under-

¶24

i) The Defendants do pay^jointty and severatty Rs. 37,17,607.81 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lac, Seventeen Thousand, Six Hundred Seven and Paisa Eighty One onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @10.70% p.a. in cash credit account and interest @9.25% for both the term loan accounts simpte from the date of fil.ing of the^{OA, i.e.} ,24/02123 ,^withcosts titt its reatization.

¶25

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the personat^properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues.^{TheDefendantsare} hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way deating with their^{properties/assets} without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant^Bank.

¶26

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(22) of^{Recovery of} Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank^may fite a^{memo of cost} within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶27

Judgmen t pronounced in the open court^{on this 18th Day of Juty, 2024 al} Camp Court Raipur.

¶28

,t4 .1^, (Ra lwas Patet) Presidin e Officer

Bank of India v. Ms Bharti Mobile

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Ms Bharti Mobile

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Metalman Industries Ltd.

Ms Hotel Royal Palace versus Central Bank of India

Ms Johri Sons through Its Prop Rajkumar Johri versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Idbi Bank versus Bisahu

Bank of India versus Shri G. Prateek Kumar

State Bank of India versus Ajay Kumar Banjare