Allowed

Bank of India v. Riyaz Patkan

DRT14 Aug 2024OA/426/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank of India applied for recovery of dues of Rs.13,44,499 from borrowers and guarantors who failed to repay a sanctioned loan and maintain cash credit account despite reminders and notice. The defendants appeared ex parte. The tribunal decreed the claim.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs.13,44,499 with future interest @ 9% per annum from 30.08.2018 till realization and issue of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of India versus Riyaz Patkan — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 30.08.2018 Registered on: 19.04.2022 Decided on: 14.08.2024 Duration: Y M D 05 11 15

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.426/2022.

¶3

BANK OF INDIA ,

¶4

A Body corporate constituted under the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at Star House C-5, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051, having branch at Post Kurul, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur-413 213, known as Kurul Branch.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mr. Riyaz Basheer Pathan

¶8

R/at Post Hiwarwadi, Taluka Georai, District Beed - 431 130.

¶9

2. M/s Bhima Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Address- At Post Takali Sikandar, Taluka-Mohol, District Solapur-413 213

¶10

3. Mr. Kayyum Yusuf Shaikh At Post Hiwarwadi, Taluka Georai, District Beed – 431 130. … Defendants

¶11

APPEARANCES

¶12

For the Applicant Mr. V S S P SARMA - Advocate. For the Defendant Ex parte.

¶13

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.13,44,499/-

(OA No.426/2022)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 14^th August, 2024)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of Rs.13,44,499/- together with interest thereon @ 12.55% per annum with half yearly rests, from the date of filing of the application till actual payment and realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:-

¶21

Defendant No.1 is a Principal Borrower and recipient of the Loan Facility granted by the Applicant Bank and Defendant No.2 is Bhima Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. engaged in business of manufacturing of Sugar and services of harvesting and transport contractors in every crushing season. Defendant No.2 on 09.06.2015 approached to the Applicant Bank requesting to grant loan of Rs.33.92 Crore to the individual contractors for crushing season 2015-2016. The Applicant Bank sanctioned aggregate/cumulative clean demand loan limit of Rs.24.96 Crores for harvesting & transportation to Defendant No.2 for crushing season 201516, on certain terms and conditions.

¶22

Upon the request of Defendant No.1, the Applicant Bank has sanctioned him Harvesting and Transport Finance

(OA No.426/2022)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

/Demand Loan of Rs.09,60,000/-, on 03.09.2015. Defendant No.1 has executed following security documents for due repayment of the said loan facility i.e. Demand Promissory Note, Draft Declaration, Agreement/Letter of authority, Consent-cum-undertaking, Composite undertaking etc.

¶27

Defendant No.2 through its Director, Executive Director & Vice Chairman has given stamped undertaking regarding H & T advance for the season 2015-16.

¶28

Defendant No.3 has executed and delivered a Deed of Guarantee dated 03.09.2015 and thereby guaranteed repayment of the dues under the aforesaid facilities to the Applicant Bank.

¶29

Defendant No.2 was to recover the dues of the Applicant Bank from Defendant No.1’s Harvesting and Transport Bill payable to him and the same was to be deposited in the Loan Account of Defendant No.1 with the Applicant Bank.

¶30

It is contended by the Applicant Bank that Defendant No.1 has availed of the aforesaid facilities sanctioned by the Applicant Bank. However, Defendant Nos.1 to 3 failed and neglected to regularize the said loan account and failed to maintain the cash credit account, despite of various

(OA No.426/2022)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

reminders. Therefore, the said loan account of Defendant No.1 has been declared as NPA on 31.03.2018. Thereafter, Applicant Bank on 12.06.2018 issued Notice through Advocate to the defendants to pay the outstanding amounts. Despite service of the Notice, defendants failed and neglected to comply with the demand in the said recall Notice.

¶35

Hence, this application is filed.

¶36

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 18.04.2024 passed below the Application (Exhibit-01).

¶37

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Vinod Dinkarrao Joshi, Senior Manager and produced on record the Original Loan Transaction documents at Exhibits AW-1 to AW-20 which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶38

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the Applicant Bank.

¶39

Since defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Applicant Bank. Therefore, the Applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

(OA No.426/2022)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.55% p.a. Considering the facts of the present case; I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for all the facilities, it would be just and reasonable.

¶44

Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶45

ORDER

¶46

(A) Original Application No.426/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶47

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the Applicant Bank Rs.13,44,499/(Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Fourty Four Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Nine only) with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 30.08.2018 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶48

¶49

(D) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶50

Sd/Place: Pune (Dilip G. Murumkar) Date: 14.08.2024 Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

(OA No.426/2022)

Page 5 of 5

[ANIL]

[ANIL] (OA No.426/2022) Page 6 of 5

Bank of India v. Riyaz Patkan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Riyaz Patkan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus Chandrakant Bandgar

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Adinath Weaving Mills Prop. Mrs Pooja Shivraj Lole

Federal Bank versus Housrao Gadekar

Bank of India versus Arjun Khade

Canara Bank versus Digambar Ghayal

Bank of Maharashtra versus Dada Pawar