Allowed

Uco Bank v. Ms Lakshmi alias Laxmi Traders

DRT19 Sept 2024OA/436/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application by ex parte order. The court found jurisdiction and validity of the claim based on bank records and issued a recovery certificate for the owed debt.

What did the court decide?

Award of debt of Rs. 1,28,12,606/- with interest and costs, and issuance of Recovery Certificate under Section 19(22).

Uco Bank versus Ms Lakshmi alias Laxmi Traders — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

OA 436 of 20221 Jl

DRT, PATN A

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶5

Karpuri Thakur Sa(lan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶6

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶7

OA Case No. 436 of 2022

¶8

UCO Bank. Frazer Road Branch. Patna 800 001

¶9

, Applicant

¶10

¶11

M/s Lakshmi @ Laxmi Traders, through its proprietor Mukteshwar Prasad Verma, Son of Late Maheshwar Prasad Verma, H/o Ramanand Prasad Verma retired IAS, Mohan Industry Road, New Yarpur, Patna, Pin 800 002, (Borrower)

¶12

Abhishek Anand, Son of Late Maheshwar Prasad Verma. Mohan Industry Road, New Yarpur, Patna, Pin 800 002 (Guarantor)

¶13

Kamla Devi. Wife ofNageshwar Narayan Prasad, Resident of ''Kamla Villa”, Alkapuri, P.O.- Gardanibagh. Patna- 800 002 (Guarantor)

¶14

Sushila Verma, W/o Late Mahesh\var Prasad Verma

¶15

Shashibala Sahay @ Verma, D/o Late Maheshwar Prasad Verma

¶16

Subala Verma, D/o Maheshwar Prasad Verma

¶17

Priya Prasad @ Priya Pd. Verma, D/o Maheshwar Prasad Verma

¶18

Miss Sarita Verma, D/o Maheshwar Prasad Verma All defendant no. 4 to 8 are resident of H/o Ramanand Prasad Verma, Retired I.A.S., Mohan Industry Road, New Yarpur, Patna 800 002

¶19

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶20

Present:

¶21

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶22

Shri Anjani Kumar Mishra. Advocate None

¶23

Dated : 19.09.2024

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

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

tAn

OA 436 of 2022jJl

DRT, PATNA

06.08.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.1,28,12,606/- as on 30.06.2022 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 01.07.2022 with costs till realization.

¶31

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant. During pendency of the O. A. Applicant Bank has filed an IA Diary No.439 of 2023 to implead the guarantors and legal heirs of deceased Maheshwar Prasad Verma as inadvertently they were not impleaded at the time of filing of the present OA. Said IA was allowed by this Tribunal vide order dated 04.07.2023 and defendant no.4 to 8 were impleaded as defendants.

¶32

On the request of the father of Defendant no.1, Late Maheshwar Prasad Verma, C.C. loan of Rs.25 lakh was sanctioned by the applicant bank under UCO Trade Scheme for which he had submitted an application on 31.01.2003. Said loan was for financial assistance to run the business of T. V., Phone, Home Appliance etc. on the request of the father of defendant no.I his CC account, which was maintained with PNB, Budha Colony, Patna had been transferred in this Bank.

¶33

Further on the request of Late Maheshwar Prasad Verma said cash credit limit had been enhanced up to Rs.40 lakh, which was sanctioned on 28.01.2005.

¶34

It has been further stated that after the death of Maheshwar Prasad Verma9 all his legal heirs had been agreed that Mukteshwar Prasad Verma would act as proprietor of defendant no.1 and also agreed to mortgage the land and property in favour of the applicant bank and they would never have any objection and claim of their property till satisfaction of the bank loan. In this regard on 27.05.2012, a family settlement had been done.

¶35

Defendant no.I approached the applicant bank for enhancement of facility of cash credit limit to Rs.79 Lakh, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 25.10.2013. To secure the loan facility the defendants

OA 436 of 20221 Jl

DRT, PATNA

executed various loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank. The rate of interest was agreed @ 12.2% with monthly rests. As security the defendant no.2 and 3 as guarantors had created an equitable mortgage of immovable property as collateral security in favour of the bank by deposit of partition deed no. 14541 dated 11.12.2004, which respect of the property as mentioned in Schedule-A of the OA.

¶41

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial 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 3 1 .03.20 1 7.

¶42

Thereafter the applicant bank issued demand notice on 02.12.2017 u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and taken possession of the mortgaged property vide possession notice dated 17.03.2018. It has been stated that said property has been sold and sale amount of Rs.37.51 Lakh has been deposited in loan account and claim amount of Rs.1,28,12,606/- as on 30.06.2022 is due and payable by the defendants.

¶43

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.

¶44

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.1,28,12,606/- as on 30.06.2022 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 01.07.2022 till the realization.

¶45

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 20.09.2022 & 27.07.2023, 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 appeared9 hence9 the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently. substituted service by publication of notice by

OA 436 of 20221 Jl

DRT, PATN A

way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 29.10.2022 and 06.10.2023 in ''Prabhat Khabar’' newspaper.

¶51

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 04.12.2023 .

¶52

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 Abhishek Sinha, Branch Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶53

SI-N')	IDescriptionofDocuments Photocopies	Amount	Signatur Executants	eof	Ex./ Ann No
	t	25.00	Def.no.2 and dece Maheshwa Verma	& 3 ased rPd	1
a		25.00	Bank accepted Def.no.2 & and dece Maheshwa Verma	and by 3 ased rPd	2
a		40.00	Bank accepted Def.no.2 & and dece Maheshwa Verma	and by 3 ased rPd	3
a		79.00	Bank accepted def.no.1	and by	4
	e	79.00	Def.no.1
	r	79.00	Def.no.1
	o	79.00	Def.no.1
	r borrower/guarantors to ensureforthebenefit ofthe successor and assigns of thebank		Defendants
	c	e			9
	e	e
	r equitablemortgageregister owing toincreasein limits	e

\d,<\S\

DRT, PATN A

OA 436 of 20221 Jl

Draft of letter to obtained frommortgag for covering increase limits	be ers in	17.01.2017	Def.no.1
Photoco of sale deed
of M reve receIpt	nue
)		21.07.2022	Bank
Statementofaccounts			Bank
Notice		02.12.2017	Bank
Possessionnotice		17.03.2018	Bank
Notice		15.02.2019	Bank
Notice		15.02.2019	Bank

¶59

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶60

Ld. Counsel of applicant 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.

¶61

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.

¶62

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 Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. 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.

¶63

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 31.03.2017, whereas the present application has been filed on 06.08.2022. Further to secure

DRT. PATN A

OA 436 of 2022jJI

the loan facility the defendants created equitable mortgage of immovable property, which was sold by the bank on 14.03.2019. 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.

¶68

Shri Abhishek Sinha, Branch Manager 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.

¶69

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.

¶70

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 affidavit 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.

¶71

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.

¶72

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certifIed copy of any entry in a banker's book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry. and shall be adnlitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original enIm' itself is non’ by law admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶73

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.

OA 436 of 2022jJI

DRT, PATNA

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.

¶78

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 30.06.2022 has been proved to be Rs.1,28,12,606/- 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 final realization of the claim.

¶79

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. 1,28, 12,606/- as on 30.06.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @ 12.2 % p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 06.08.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶80

ORDER

¶81

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.1,28,12,606/- as on 30.06.2022 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 12.2% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 06.08.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶82

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

U “${\

OA 436 of 2022jJl

DRT, PATN A

Defendants are debaned from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged 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 mortgaged 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 Bankruptcy 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.

¶88

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 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(1/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants.

¶89

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 04.11.2024. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶90

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on

¶91

IT '’T:“''*'' ' "::' Dictated &corrected by me.me. , ,)qr L/“/H~ p

¶92

Dictated &corrected by me.me.

¶93

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶94

¶95

FOR$1 NO. 9 [Sec Regulation 24( 1 )]

¶96

DEB 1 S liE('o\’[..R' TI{1131 JN AL PATN A

¶97

2nd Floor. ( A. B & F Wing) Kan)un Thakur Sadan. Kcndrlva Kamnrchari Parisar (GP€iA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025

¶98

RECQ\’ER\’ GEt{FIFI('ATE UNDER SECTION 19(2) READ \'ITH $EC’FIQN IPI a) OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT? 1993945 INIt XI)ED FROM TINIE TQ TIME.

RC No. 237/2024

Case No: OA/436/2022

III thc Matter of (CH- 1) LI(’o BANK FRASER BRANC'H ROAD.

¶103

AppIIcant( s )

¶104

PA-FN A , BIHAR -8(i(NI(II

¶105

–-–- Versus

¶106

¶107

(CD- 1) MS LAKSHMI ALIAS LAXMI TRADERS thruugtl its Proprietor Mluktcqhwar Prasad \’erma. S/o Late Nlahcshu'ur Prasad Vcr111a. H/ct Ranranand Prasad Vcrnra retired IAS N41ohan Industry Road. Nc\v Yilrpur Patnu. Pin 800002. (Borrower) Patna .BIHAR .HUt)002

¶108

(CD- 2) ABHISHEK ANAND

¶109

SON UF LATE MAHESHWAR PRASAD VERM A. MOHAN

¶110

INDUSTRY R( )AD, N E\V YARPU R, PATN A, PIN-800002 ( GUARANTOR)

¶111

(CD- 3) KANIL A DEVI

¶112

\'IFE OF NAGESHWAR NARAYAN PRASAD. RESIDENT UF KANILA VILLA. AL.KAPLIRI. P.O - (3ARDANIBAGH. PATNASt it )III): (G LIA RA NTf}R )

¶113

(CD- 4) SUSHILA VERNIA \N tO LATE MAHFSHWAR PRASAD VERNIA RESIDENT OF H/O RAMAMANr) PRASAD VERNfA RETIRED I.A.S., MOHAN INDUSTRY ROAD. NEW YARPUR PATN A 800002

¶114

Defendant(s)

¶115

(CD- 5) SUBALA VERMA D’O MAHESH \VAR PRASAD 'ERM A RESIDENT OF A, O RANiAMANr) PRASAD VERNt A RETIRED I. A.S.. NIOHAN INDUSTl{' ROAr). NE\’ 'ARPU R PATN A 80000:

¶116

(CD- 6) PRI)’A PRASAD ALIAS PRI)’A PD. VERM A D/U MAHESI]WAR PRASAD VERMA RESIDENT OF H/C) RAMAMAND PRASAD VERMA RETIRED 1.A.S.. MOHAN INI)USTRY ROAD, NE\V 'ARPUR PATNA 800002

¶117

(CD- 7) MISS SARITA \rERNIA, D/'0 LATE MAHESHWAII PD. VERM A RESIDENT OF ItAMANIAND PRASAD VERM A RETIRED IAS MOHAN INDLIS’FR' ROAD NEW YARPU R PATN A PIN 8t)lit)t):

¶118

Rucovrry Certificate for Rs 12812606,00 1 Rupcef One erore Twcnt)aght Lakhs Twelve Thousands Six Hundred Si\ Only_]

¶119

In terms of fInal order dated 19/09/2024 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case. it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 12812606.00 along u’itIl cost. expenses and interest from the 06/08/2022 i.e. date of fIling / with effective date of the OA/436/2022 and future interest fron1 order date till thc date of rcalisiltiolr ill full, jointly or severally from the CcrtjHcdtc Debtors, hereinafter referred Ill as:-

¶120

CD NanIe nI. Type/Xii)de Rate Effect i\ Date c Ordcr Alllount(Rs.) I Liability Type
M y) Interest 12.2 1 9/t)9/2tJ24 1 128 12606.00 128 12606.00
BHISHEK ANAND 19/09/2024 : 128 12606.00 128 1 2606.00
MLA DEVI 2.2 @; G12812606.00 128 1 2606.00
12.2 1 9/09,'2024 ; 1 28 12606.00 As on 128 1 2606.00
2.2 9/09/2tt24 t 128 12606.oo And As on 128 12606.00
Date
crest As on
TO'i Date 1 28 12606,00

¶121

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount u’ithin 30 days. same shall be recovered from the sale of the nrongaged/hypothecated assets as u’eII as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the celtificate debtors

¶122

The nrortgagcd or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in qllcstion are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding ill pul:suancc of the Recovcly ccrtiticatc issued undcl' Scctioll 1 9(22) of ltccovcl)/ of F)L’btS alld Bankruptcy Act 1993 Parties are clinctecl to appcul' I)ellrre ASHISH KURI AR . Rect)\ erv Qlllcer. DEBTS REC'UVERY -rRiBUN AL PA'rN A OII 04/ I1 ,'2024

¶123

The Recovery Othcer sllall realize the amount as per this C’crtiHcate in the nlalrner and mode prescribed ulrder Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Duc to Banks and Financial Institutions Acl, 1993 (as 3nrcndcd from time to time ) from thc abclvc named Ccrtincatc Debtors

¶124

This Ccnitlcatc Iras been issued undcr my signature and seal of thc Tribunal on this 20/09/2024

¶125

/;W' Debts {:gj::lait\bsM\ Patna

¶126

PRESIDID60FFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATN A

¶127

FORM NO. 10 [See Regulation 24(2)]

¶128

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶129

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

¶130

Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025,

¶131

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 237/2024

Case No: OA/436/2022

Applicant(s): UCO BANK Versus

¶136

Defendant(s): MS LAKSHMI ALIAS LAXMI TRADERS

¶137

ItemofCosts	IAmountinRs
)	131000
ProcessFees(Inc. Publication)
AdvocateFees	@
e	[0
MiscellaneousCharges	nc
Total Costs:Rs	13 1000

¶138

Place: PATNA

¶139

Date: 20/09/2024

¶140

PRESIDING &fFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶141

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Uco Bank v. Ms Lakshmi alias Laxmi Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Ms Lakshmi alias Laxmi Traders

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

Farhana K C versus Canara Bank

Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank) versus Sh.Sukhavinder Singh

Union Bank of India (E-Andhra Bank) versus M/S Jmb Steel

Punjab National Bank versus Paramdeep Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Nitu Devi

Union Bank of India versus Ms Sunita Enterprises