Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Md. Abu Nasir Ansari

DRT18 Sept 2024OA/418/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, IDBI Bank sought recovery of Rs. 60.13 lakh from borrowers and guarantors. The Tribunal found the documents and loan account verified by affidavit conclusive due to non-appearance of respondents. The debt was determined and a recovery certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

The debt of Rs. 60,13,836/- with interest is determined. A recovery certificate was issued, and respondents are debarred from transferring assets.

Idbi Bank versus Md. Abu Nasir Ansari — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DRT. PATN A

¶2

OA 418 of 2022 1.11

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal. Patna Karpuri Thakur Sadan. Aashiana Digha Road at PATN A-800025

¶4

Presiding Officer : Shri KaushalendraYadav

¶5

OA Case no. : 418 of 2022

¶6

IDBI Bank Ltd., BrQjesh Automobiles Building, Ravi Commercial Complex. Nduratan Hata. N.H. 31 Purnea. P.S.-Purena. District-Purnea. Pin code 854301

¶7

. . . . . . .Applicant

¶8

¶9

Md. Abu Nasir Ansari S/o Haji Islam Ansari. At Madhopara. Purnea City. P.S.-K. Hat. District-Purnea. Pin code 854302. PAN no. BTOPA502 IR

¶10

Md. Nasim Ansari S/o Late Muslim Ansari. At Durga Bari. Khazanchihat P.S.-K. Hat. District-Purnea. Pin code-854301. PAN no. ACPPA3549K.

¶11

Md. Shaiqua Praveen W/o Md. Nasim Ansari. At Durga Bari. Khazanchihat. P.S.-K. Hat. District-Purnea. Pincode-854301 .

¶12

. . . Defendants.

¶13

Present: For the Applicant : Shri J.K. Roy. Advocate For the Defendants : None

¶14

Dated: 18.09.2024

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

1- The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 27.7.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.60. 13.836/- as on 30.6.2022alongwithpendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 1.7.2022with costs till realization.

¶17

2- The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank. is a body corporate. incorporated and registered under the companies Act 1956 ( 1 of 1956) and a banking company within the meaning of section 5 C'> under the Banking regulation Act 1949 carrying the business of Banking and having its registered office at TDBT Tower. WTC complex. Cuff-e Parade. Mumbai-400005 and its Zonal Office at Sai Corporate Park. Rukanpura. Bailey Road. Patna- 14 and its Regional office at Khalitbad Chowk. Bhagalpur and Branch Of’Uce at Brajesh Automobiles Building. Ravi Commercial

OA 418 of 2022 IJI

DRT, PATN A

Complex. Nauratan Hata. N.H. 31 Purnea. P.S.-Purena. District-Purnea. Pin code 854301 .

¶23

3 . The defendant no. 1 is borrower and defendant no. 2 & 3 are guarantors. The defendants approached the bank for cash credit loan of Rs.48 lakh on 10.2.2016. The bank sanctioned the same on 16.2.2016 against hypothecation of Agri Products for the period of 12 months payable with interest @10.50% p.a. with monthly rests. The defendants executed the various loan documents. The defendant no. 2 & 3 have mortgaged his property details given at page 14 in schedule II of OA. The defendant no. 1 approached the bank for renewal of the said cash credit limit of Rs.48 lakh for the said purpose and submitted an application before the bank on 21.7.2017 the bank considered the same and renewed the said cash credit limit on 2,4.7.2017. The defendant no. 1 approached the bank on 9.1.2019 & 9.7.2020 to renewal of the said cash credit limit of Rs.48 lakh for the said purpose. The bank sanctioned the same and renewed the said cash credit limit on 3 1.1.2019 & 9.7.2020.

¶24

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the HnanciaI norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank. in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 1.1.2022

¶25

Since. the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank. hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶26

Thus the total liability in the loan account is Rs.60,13,836/-with pendentelite and future interest at the contractual rate from 1.7.2022 till the realization

¶27

OA 418 of 2022 IJl

¶28

DRT, PATN A

¶29

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 6.9.2022. requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules. 1993. But the defendants have not appeared, hence. the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently. substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 14.4.2023 in “Dainik Jagaran” newspaper.

¶30

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper. the defendants have appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to file written statement. but they failed to mle WS. hence. the Tribunal has passed an order to opportunity for the filing written statement stands closed on 29.6.2024.

¶31

To prove its case. the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Rajeev Ranjan, A(JM of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶32

SI-N	of '’Description Documents Photocopies	1Date of Execution	Amount	Signature of Executants	Ex./ IAnn No
1	Loan application	10.2.2016	Rs.48 lakh	defendant no.1	1
I	sanctionletter	16.2.2016	Rs.48 lakh	Bank	a
a -)	l		Rs.48 lakh	defendant no.I	in ,)
4	DPnote	16.2.2016	Rs.48lakh	defendant no.1	4
5	hypothec,itioil	16.2.2016	Rs.48lakh	deft:nM no.1	5
6	letterofguarantee	16.2.1016	Rs.48 lakh	amt– no. 2&3	6
7	copy ofdeclaration undertaking. copyof saledeedsandMOE	16.2.2016		defendant no. 2&3	7
8	sanction letter	24.7.2017	Rs.48lakh	bank	8
9	c debtscun1revivalletter			defendants	9
10	s		Rs.48 lakh	bank	10
11	e acknowledgementcum revival letter			defendant no. I &2	11

DRT. PATN A

OA +18 of 2022 1.Jl

letter	9.7.2020	bank
of acknowledgement debtscumrevivalletter	9.7.2020	defendant no. I &2
recallnotice	5.1.2022	bank
recallnotice	22.1.2022
and demandnotice ossessron notIce	102 2022 274o0o2	bank
a	( as 30.6.2022	bank

¶37

8 Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶38

Ld. Counsel of dpplicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further. submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates. and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶39

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court. in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate. as claimed for. in OA.

¶40

It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihdr. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 1,ICS. The applicant bank is functioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore. this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶41

On the issue of Limitation. to prove it. the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 1.1.2022. whereas the present application has been filed on 27.7.2022. Even. it is counted for the purpose of Limitation. then it is established that the applicant bank has fIled the case within the limitation period. As such. it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

\on

OA 418 of 2022 IJl

DRT, PATN A

Shri Rajeev Ranjan, AGM of the applicant bank. has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶47

Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 ( 1 ) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶48

The rule 12 ( 10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules. 1993. provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant. the tribunal may act upon the affiddvit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶49

The rule 12 ( 11 ) of the aforesaid Rules. provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker's Books evidence that Act. 1891 (18 of 1891 ) shall apply to a certified copy of an entry in a Banker-s Books furnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶50

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers’ books.Subject it) tIle pro'isions Qf- this Act . a cerTifIed coIn’ Qf corY entry in CI banker 's book shall in tIll legal proceedings he received as I)rinlcl facie evidence of tlrc existence of such entry. and shall be adnlitled cls evidence of Itre llldllers. trclnsactions and accounts therein recorded in everY case \there. and to tIte sclnle cIIent CIS. the original entrY itself is no\t bY law clditlissible. bIlt noI f'urlhel' or ol hentise.

¶51

As such the certifIed true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence The statement of account maintained in the ordinary^{course of} business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account. more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged

¶52

On perusal of the application. documents. affIdavit and on consideration of the arguments. it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with Interests etc.. the defendants have executed various loan documents. as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account

ron

OA 418 of 2022 IJI

DRT, PATN A

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O. A.. was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 30.6.2022 has been proved to be Rs.60,13.836/- only by way of statement of account. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and tlnal realization of the claim.

¶58

In my view. facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly. the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.60.13.836/-alongwith pendente-lite and future interest ra)10.50% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 27.7.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly. to meet the ends of justice.

¶59

ORDER

¶60

In the result. the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally. ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.60.13.836/-alongwith pendente-lite and future interest (Z1110.50% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 27.7.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs

¶61

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants. be deducted in the claim amount. if not deducted.

¶62

Defendants are debarred from transferring. alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgage(i or hypothecated or any other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgage(i or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bantuuptcy Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery Certificate before the Registrar/Sub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets

¶63

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be \4%

DRT, PATN A

OA 118 of 2022 1.Jl

issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery OffIcer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants. by sale of mortgage(i/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants.

¶68

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer. DRT. Patna on 04.1 1 .2024. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶69

Judgment signed, sealed. dated and pronounced in the open court on 1 8th day of September. 2024.

¶70

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶71

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal. Patna

¶72

FORM NO. 9

¶73

¶74

[See Regulation 24( 1 )]

¶75

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶76

2nd Floor, ( A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan. Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Dighd Road, Patna-800025

¶77

RECOVERY CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 19(Z) READ WITH SECTION 19(B) OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1993, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

¶78

RC No. 214/2024 [N Case No: OA/418/2tJ22

¶79

In the Matter of (CH- 1) IDBI BANK BRAJESH AUTOMOBILES BUILDING RAVI COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, NAURATAN H ATA N.H 31 PURNEA. P.S-PURNEA PURNIA ,BiHAR -854301

¶80

Applicant(s)

¶81

--–-- Versus ---–--

¶82

(CD- 1) MD. ABU NASIR ANSARI S/o Haji Islam AnsaR At- Madht)para . Purnea City .P.S.- K.Hat Ptlrnia .BIHAR -854302

¶83

(CD- 2) MD. NASIM ANSARI S/O LATE MUSLIM ANSARI AT- DURGA BARI, KHAZANCHIHAT P.S.- K.HAT DISTRICTPURNEA PIN CODE- 854301

¶84

Defendant(s)

¶85

(CD- 3) MD, SHAIQUA PRAVEEN W/O MD. NASIM ANS ARI, AT- DURGA BARI KHAZANC'HIH AT P.S.- K.HAT DISTRIC'TPURNEA PIN CODE- 85430

¶86

Recovery CertifIcate for Rs 6013836.00 1 Rupees Sixty Lakhs Thirteen Thousands Eight Hundred Thirty Six Only_1

¶87

In terms of final order dated 18/09/2024 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the Applicant Certitlcate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 6013836.00 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 27/07/2022 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the o A/4 18/2022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full. jointly or severally from the C'ertincate Debtors. hereinafter referred to ds:-

¶88

r.no!CDName	Int. 'i Type/Mode	Int. Rate	IEffective Date	Order Date	It(Rs. Ino	). Lia?HiB	Interest !; I!docnr Date)	: IfcIL1[1[1o=A:( 1R11sn)
MD,ABU SIR ANSARI	terest Monthly )	10.50	;:27/07/20	g/09/2024	3836.00	lointly ;everally	IntcrcstAs inOrder Date	13836.00
MD. NASIM ANSARI	lpound ntcrest Monthly)	10.50	-$27/07/20::	8qi9/2024	iGa13836.00	lointl<br>iAnd lly	Interest As Order IDate	;l6013836.00
\1 ID. SHAIQUA PRAVEEN

¶89

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days. same shall be recovered from the sale of the moltgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other pcrsonal movable/ Immovable assets of the celtitlcate debtors

¶90

The mollgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the fInal order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery cenincate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovely of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1 993

¶91

Parties are directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR , Recovery Ot11cer. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 04/ 11/2024.

¶92

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Celtincate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act. 1993 (as amended horn time to time) from the above named Cenitlcate Debtors.

¶93

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 19/09/2024

¶94

PRESI8TSIG OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶95

FORM NO. 10

¶96

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶97

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶98

2nd Floor. ( A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar

¶99

(GPOA). Ashiana Digha Road. Patna-800025.

¶100

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 214/2024

Case No: OA/418/2022

Applicant(s): IDBI BANK Versus

¶105

Defendant(s): MD. ABU NASIR ANSARI

¶106

	Item ofCosts	[ .mountinRs
	Feeontheapplication	m
2	1	[0
3	c	bc
4	o	b(
5	4iscellaneousCharges
	-otalCosts:Rs	F63000

¶107

Place: PATNA

¶108

Date: 19/09/2024

¶109

PRESIDI&e6FFlcER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶110

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Idbi Bank v. Md. Abu Nasir Ansari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Md. Abu Nasir Ansari

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

Mujeeb Rahman v K versus Manjeri Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd.

Abdul Kareem Haji Keyath versus Manjeri Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Natubhai

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Maa Jagdamba Traders

Axis Bank versus Sh. Navneet Gulati

Uco Bank versus M/S Dreams Plus Consulting Pvt. Ltd.