Allowed

Bank of India v. Satyendra Singh

DRT3 Oct 2024OA/363/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's original application for recovery of outstanding dues of approximately Rs. 1.94 Crore from the Defendants, who failed to respond despite being served with notices. The court ordered payment of dues, interjection on properties, and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs. 1,94,67,001.06 with simple interest at 10.30% per annum; injunction on properties; issuance of Recovery Certificate under Section 19(2) RDB Act.

Bank of India versus Satyendra Singh — 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

Original Applicotion No. - 363/23

¶5

Bank of lndia, 3-A, lndustrial Area, A.B. Road, Dewas (M.P.)

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

01 ) Mr. Satyendra Singh, S/o Mr. Hariman Singh

¶9

1. Mr. Dhirendra Singh, 5/o Mr. Hariman Singh

¶10

1. Mrs. Usha Devi, W/o Mr. Hariman Singh

¶11

(Att R/o L.l.G.-177, Vikas Nagar,

¶12

Dewas, M.P. 455001 ) Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Ashish Shroti, Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Dated : 03'd October, 20241

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Originat App[ication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 09102123 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,94,67,001 .06^(Rupees One Crore, Ninety Four Lac, Sixty Seven Thousand One and Paisa Six onty) atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendants, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Loan Against Property^(LAP) of Rs. 165 Lac on 70/03117 and in consideration of the same the Defendantsⁱⁿ addition to execution of loan documents have atso created^equitable mortgage over the immovabte^property, i.e., Diverted^{Land bearingSurvey} No.-26413, P.H. No.-41, Vittage-Bitawti, District-Dewas^{(M.P.),admeasuring} 1.01 t hectare; betonging to Defendant No.-1. The said^{propertywas atso} mortgaged against the loan sanctioned to M/s Surya Machine Toots^{Pvt Ltd in} which the Defendant No.-1 is a Director. The Defendants avaited^{the credit} facitity and atso executed Letter of Acknowtedgment of^{Debt/Securities on} 18/03/20. The account became NPA and the Defendants faited to^tiquidate

¶18

¶19

oA363123

¶20

the outstanding dues despite issuance of Demand Notice on^'14111 /22 by the Appticant Bank. The Applicant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex A-l to A-18 which were^proved by Shri Vikas Kumar, Chief Manager.

¶21

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 10/04124. 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 liabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its application has ctaimed interest @10.30%^p.a. with monthly^{rests.However, I feel} it^{fair and reasonabteto} grant interest @10.30% p.a. simple pendentetite and future titl realization of the dues. The mortgaged^property is tiabte to be sold for recovery of amount due atong with the personat^properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶22

The Original Apptication is altowed and it is ordered as under-

¶23

i) The Defendants do pay^jointty and severatly Rs.^'1,94,67,001 .06 (Rupees One Crore, Ninety Four Lac, Sixty Seven Thousand One and Paisa Six onty) together with^pendentetite and future interest @10.30%^per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,09107123, with costs titl its realization.

¶24

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to sett the mortgaged as wetl as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by nreans of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way dealing with their properties/assets without first paying the claim of the Appticant Bank.

¶25

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(221 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶26

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 03'd Day of October, 2024.

¶27

'' (Ram Niwas Pate t) Presidine 0fficer

Bank of India v. Satyendra Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Satyendra Singh

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 Soumiya Agency

Idbi Bank versus Sarla Singh Borkar

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shri Wire Industries

Bank of India versus M/S Gourav Kumar Raja Rathore

State Bank of India versus Ms R K Traders

Hdfc Bank versus Rajneesh Kumar