Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Go Easy Frozen Food

DRT26 Sept 2024OA/394/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Limited against the Defendants for recovery of outstanding banking dues. The Court granted the principal amount along with interest and direction for issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Pay Rs. 99,28,023.28 with 10% p.a. interest; Recovery Certificate issued under Section 19(2); Injunction against transfer of assets.

Hdfc Bank versus Go Easy Frozen Food — Banking and Recovery | 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

Original Applicotion No.^- 394122

¶5

HDFC Bank Limited, South Civit Lines, Jabatpur (M.P.)

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Go Easy Frozen Food,

¶9

01 ) Through its ProprietorMr. Yuvraj Marvet, s/o Sharas Marvert

¶10

Mr. Yuvraj Marval

¶11

(Both at 5/2, Mahesh Nagar, ..... Defendants Gati No.-1, lndore, M.P.)

¶12

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Shashank Verma, Advocate

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Dated : 26s Septernber,2024\

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 22103/72 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs.99,28,023.28 (Rupees Ninety Nine Lac, Twenty Eight Thousand, Twenty Three and Paisa Twenty Eight onty) atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶17

Z. The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its proprietor Defendant No.-2, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 11 lac on 05/07/16 which was further enhanced up to Rs. 80 Lac on 15101120 and GECLof Rs.^'12 Lacon05106120 and in consideration of the same the Defendants executed requisite loan documents from time to time as and when the credit facitity was renewed /en hanced / sanctioned. The Defendants avaited the credit facitities but faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recatl Notice on 15/02/22 by the Appticant Bank. The Applicant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-52 which were proved by Shri Ashish Rawat, Manager in Department for Special Operations.

¶18

¶19

oA394122

¶20

3, Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared^nor fited written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte^{vide order dated} 'l?108/24. 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 claimed contractual interest @10% p.a. with penal interest. However, I feet it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @10% p.a. simpte pendentetite and future titl reatization of the dues. The^{personal properties} and assets of the Defendants are [iabte to be sold for recovery of amount due.

¶21

The Original Application is attowed and it is ordered as under-

¶22

'i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatly Rs. 99,28,023.28 (Rupees Ninety Nine Lac, Twenty Eight Thousand, Twenty Three and Paisa Twenty Eight onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @10% per annum simple from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,22/03/22, with costs titt its realization.

¶23

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to set[ the personal properties and assets of the Defendants for realization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way deating with their properties/ assets without first paying the claim of the Appticant Bank.

¶24

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued u/s 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, The appticant bank may file a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶25

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 26th Day of September,2024.

¶26

.q
Ra m Niwas Patet)
Presidine Officer

Hdfc Bank v. Go Easy Frozen Food

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Go Easy Frozen Food

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

Hdfc Bank versus Shri Satendra Singh Raghuwanshi

Devesh Sharma Son of Shri Bholanath Sharma versus Laxmi Mahila Nagrik Sahakari Bank Maryadit

Hdfc Bank versus Vikas Singh Khichi

Idbi Bank versus Mugdha Devi Chandel

Bank of India versus Naveen Rathore

Bank of India versus M/S Alish Beverages Pvt. Ltd.