Allowed

State Bank of India v. Dilip Singh Pawar

DRT5 Sept 2024OA/284/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by the State Bank of India for recovery of dues of Rs. 54,47,188.83 plus interest from the respondents. The court granted a recovery certificate and imposed an injunction on the respondents from dealing with mortgaged or personal properties without payment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs. 54,47,188.83 with interest at 10.60% p.a., recovery certificate issuance, and injunction on asset transfer.

State Bank of India versus Dilip Singh Pawar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'ble Shri Ram Niwas Patel)

¶4

Originol Applicotion No. - 284122

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 5, Yashwant Niwas Road, lndore (M.P.) 452003

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shri Ditip Singh Pawar, 5/o Shri Bheru Singh Pawar, Proprietor of M/s Megha Graphics, Rlo 44218, Mishrital Nagar, Dewas (M.P.) 455001; Atso at: Ptot/Buitding/Flat No.-55, M.G. Road, Dewas (M.P.) 455001 Atso at: House No.^-51 5, Seth Mishrital Nagar, Dewas (M.P.) 455001 02) Smt. Mona Pawar, W/o Shri Dilip Singh Pawar, Rlo 44218, Mishrilal Nagar, Dewas^(M.P.) 455001 Atso at: House No.-515, Seth Mishritat Nagar, Dewas (M.P.) 455001 Defendants

¶9

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Jagbandan Patel, Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶10

JUDGT,1ENT

¶11

(Dated : 05th September,2024)

¶12

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Originat Application u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 23102127 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs.54,47,188,83 (Rupees Fifty Four Lac, Fourty Seven Thousand, One Hundred Eighty Eight and Paisa Eighty Three onty) along with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶13

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 24 Lac on 28/08/17 which was further enhanced to Rs. 45 Lac on 19/03/19 and Funded lnterest Term Loan of Rs.2,50,275l- as per COVID-19 Regutatory Package 2020. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facitities the

¶14

¶15

oA284/22

¶16

Defendant No.-1 as borrow and^{Defendant No.-2as guarantorin addition to} execution of loan and^{guarantee documents have atso createdequitabte} mortgage over the immovabte^{properties, i.e.,}

¶17

i) Residentiat Ptot No.-513, admeasuring^{1500 sq.ft., Seth} Mishritat Nagar, Near Kaita Devi Tempte,^Dewas(M.P' );^{betonging to} Defendant No.^-2;

¶18

ii) Residentiat House situated at Plot No.-515,^{Seth Mishritat} Nagar, Near Kaita Devi Temple, Dewas^{(M.P.), Plot area 2000 sq.ft. or 185.87} sq.mtr.; betonging to Defendant No.-1. The Defendant No.-1 availed the credit facilities and also executed Revival Letter on 04/06170. The accounts were classified^{as NPA on} 31 103/21 and the Defendants faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Legal Notice on 07101122 and initiation of action under the Securitisation Act by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has relied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-15 which were^proved by Shri Tamrat^La[ Kori, Chief Manager.

¶19

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11101 /23. 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 severatly tiabte to pay the claim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its^{relief ctause of the application has} ctaimed interest at contractual^{rate but has not specifiedthe prevaiting rate} of interest. However in Para 5.20 of the^{OA the present effective rate of} interest is^given as @10.60%^{p.a. with monthty rests in Para. Therefore,I} feet it fair and reasonabte to^{grant interest} @10.60%^p.a.simpte pendentetite and future ti[[ reatization of the dues. The^mortgaged properties are tiable to be sotd for recovery^{of amount due atongwith the} personal properties and assets of the Defendants'

¶20

4, The Originat Apptication^{is attowed and it is orderedas under'}

¶21

i) The Defendants do^{pay jointtyand severallyRs. 54,47,188.83} (Rupees Fifty Four Lac, Fourty Seven^{Thousand, One Hundred EightyEight} and Paisa Eighty Three onty)^{together with pendentetite and futureinterest} @10.60%^{per annum simptefrom the dateof fitingof the OA, i.e.,23102122,} with costs titl its reatization.

¶22

¶23

oA284122

¶24

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitled^{to setl the mortgagedas wetlas} personat properties and assets of the Defendants^{for realizationof its dues.} The Defendants are hereby^{restrained by means of injunctionfrom} depteting, transferring,^{encumbering, atienatingor in any way deating with} their^{properties/assetswithout first paying the ctaim of the AppticantBank'}

¶25

iii) A Recovery Certificate^{be issueduls 19(221 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 05th Day of September,2024.}

¶27

9'^q' m Niwas Patel) Presidine Officer

State Bank of India v. Dilip Singh Pawar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Dilip Singh Pawar

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

Narmada Prasad Mohar versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Amit

Axis Bank versus Tofan Singh Padihar

Bank of India versus M/S Jainam Enterprises

Sheikh Abid Son of Sheikh Ajmeri versus Centram Housing Finance Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Laxmi Medical Agencies Proprietor- Dilip Kumar Valecha (Deceased)