Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Rajiv Kumar and Others

DRT27 Sept 2024OA/378/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under RDBFI Act 1993. The court issued a recovery certificate against defendants for a housing loan shortfall. It granted uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and directed recovery from mortgaged or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 23,30,766.68 plus costs and interest at 8% p.a.; recovery directed from sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Bank of Baroda versus Rajiv Kumar and Others — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.378/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 03.02.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 27.09.2024

¶6

Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank), a body corporate, constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at Mandvi, Baroda and one of its Branches at Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar, Ludhiana through its Constituted Attorney Sh. Sachin Garg, Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar Branch, Ludhiana and who is also the principal officer of the plaintiff/applicant.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Rajiv Kumar S/o Sh. Jatinder Kumar, R/o House No.1084/2,

¶10

Street no.1, Manohar Nagar, Dhuri Line, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana.

¶11

Smt. Kanta Rani W/o Sh. Jatinder Kumar R/o House No.1084/2, Street no.1, Manohar Nagar, Dhuri Line, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana.

¶12

Sh. Jasvir Singh S/o Sh. Sarabjit Singh, R/o House No.5574, Street no.3, Gobind Nagar, Shimlapuri, Millerganj, Ludhiana.

¶13

…………Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Ashok Kumar Verma, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.23,30,766.68p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Six And Paise Sixty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sachin Garg, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide

¶18

¶19

General Power of Attorney dated 25.11.2016, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants No. 1 & 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of Housing Loan of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Loan application, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Housing Loan of Rs.24.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 29.03.2019, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No.2 had mortgaged her immovable property i.e. Plot measuring 80 Sq. Yards, situated at Daba, H.B. No.262, Abadi Madh Colony, Tehsil and District Ludhiana vide Equitable Mortgage of Sale Deed bearing Vasika no.2019-20/103/1/3634 dated 14.06.2019 with its translation, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. Documents executed:- Notification dated 02.01.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Articles of Agreement-Revised (VHL) & Letter of Guarantee both dated 29.03.2019, which are Annexures A5 & A6 to this OA; Memorandum dated 15.06.2019, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act dated 24.02.2020, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A10 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.23,30,766.68p 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 10.10.2023. Thereafter, the counsel for defendant no.2 filed an IA no.1079/2023 on 03.11.2023 to recall the order dated 10.10.2023 and the same was dismissed on 20.08.2024.

¶21

¶22

Thereafter another IA 1531/2024 was filed to recall the orders dated 10.10.2023 and 20.08.2024, which was dismissed today as not maintainable.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sachin Garg, Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda h as been filed.

¶24

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶25

It was argued by learned counsel 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 A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,30,766.68p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Six And Paise Sixty Eight Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @8.00%p.a. (excluding penal interest @2%) with monthly rests from 11.01.2022 till the realization.

¶27

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 loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while

¶28

¶29

exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account 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.23,30,766.68 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Six And Paise Sixty Eight Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account 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 SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant 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 19.10.2024.

¶30

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.

¶31

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal.

¶32

Dated: 27.09.2024

¶33

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

Bank of Baroda v. Rajiv Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Rajiv Kumar 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

Punjab National Bank versus Dalbir Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Mithu Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sadhu Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Yadwinder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Darshan Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Jagir Singh and Another