Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S Jainam Enterprises

DRT5 Sept 2024OA/398/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's application for recovery of Rs. 99,58,428.23, along with interest and costs, from the joint and several Defendants who failed to repay their loan and dues as per the agreement.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 99,58,428.23 plus interest and costs; Recovery Certificate to be issued; Defendants restrained from dealing with properties.

Bank of India versus M/S Jainam Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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. - 398122

¶5

Bank of lndia, Bichoti Mardana, lndore^(M.P.)

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

01 ) M/s Jainam Enterprises, Through its ProprietorDhruva Bagherwat, 5.No.-354, Hatka No.-24P, Asrawad Bujurg, Nemawar Road, lndore (M.P.)

¶9

1. Dhruva Bagherwal, S/o Pawan Bhagherwat, R/o 28, Kaitash Park, Manoramaganj, lndore^(M.P.)452001

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Appticant :^{Shri ShreyasDubey, Advocate}

¶12

Defendants : Ex-Parte

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

(Dated : 05th SePtember,2O24l

¶15

The Appticant-Bank has fited^{the present Originat Apptication} u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts^{andBankruptcyAct on17 103122against the} Defendants for recovery of Rs.^{99,58,428.23(Rupees Ninety Nine Lac, Fifty} Eight Thousand, Four Hundred^{Twenty Eight and Paisa Twenty Three onty)} atong with interest and other retiefs^{as stated.}

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that^{on the requestof} Defendant No.-1 through Defendant^{No.-2,the Appticant Bank sanctioned} Term Loan of Rs. 90 Lac and Cash^{CreditLimit of Rs. 5 LacaggregatingRs.} 95 Lac on 07 l1O/17 and in consideration^{ofthe samethe Defendantshave} executed requisite loan documents.^{The Defendantsavaitedthe credit} facitities and also executed Acknowtedgment of^{Debt on 31/05/19 &} 31 lO7 119 but faited to tiquidate^{the outstanding dues despiteissuanceof} Recalt Notice on 06t04t21 by the^{AppticantBank. The Appticant-Bankhas} retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to^{A-'14 which wereproved by Shri} SuniI Kumar Dhaka, Chief Manager.

¶17

¶18

oA398t22

¶19

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 09/11/27. There is therefore, no reason to disbelieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has ctaimed interest @10.60% p.a. with monthty rests. However, I feet it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @10.60% p.a. 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.

¶20

The Originat Application is altowed and it is ordered as under-

¶21

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatly Rs. 99,5g,42g.23 (Rupees Ninety Nine Lac, Fifty Eight Thousand, Four Hundred Twenty Eight and Paisa Twenty Three only) together with pendentetite and future interest @10.60% per annum simple from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e., 17 lO3/22 ,^{with costs} tit[ its realization.

¶22

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to sett the persona[ properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way deating with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶23

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.

¶24

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 05th Day

¶25

of September, 2024.
o.
9'-
was Patet)
P d'ine 0fficer

Bank of India v. M/S Jainam Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S Jainam Enterprises

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

State Bank of India versus Dilip Singh Pawar

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

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