Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Kanhaiyalal Sahu

DRT7 Aug 2024OA/444/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Member Bench allowed the Original Application filed by IDBI Bank Limited for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 34.84 lakhs from the borrower and guarantor. The bank claimed the amount unpaid against a sanctioned KCC loan secured by mortgaged land. The defendants did not appear.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 34,84,963.00 with interest; mortgagee enjoined from alienating properties; Recovery Certificate directed to be issued.

Idbi Bank versus Kanhaiyalal Sahu — Specific Performance | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'ble Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶4

Originol Application No.^- 444/22

¶5

lDBl Bank Limited, Near SBl, Ward No.-21, Charoda, G.E. Road, Bhitai, Distt.-Durg^(C.G. )

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Kanhaiyatal Sahu, 01 ) S/o Shri Atmaram Sahu

¶9

Rakesh Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Radhetat Sahu

¶10

(Both R/o House No."36, Ward No.-7, Padmavatipur, 5itpatti, Tehsit'Chhuikhadan, District-Rajnandgaon, C.G.⁴⁹¹ 885)

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri^{Amit Garg, Advocate}

¶13

Defendants : Ex-Parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Dated : 07th August, 2024)

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited the Present^{OriginalAppLication} u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and^{BankruptcyAct on 29103177against the} Defendants for recovery of Rs.^{34,84,963.00(RupeesThirtyFour Lac, Eighty} Four Thousand, Nine Hundred^{and Sixty Threeonty) atongwith interest and} other reliefs as stated.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are^{that on the requestof} Defendant No.-1, the Appticant^{Bank sanctionedKCCLoan of Rs. 25.72Lac} and in consideration of the^{same the DefendantNo.-1 as borrower and} Defendant No.-2 as^{guarantorin addition to executionof [oan and guarantee} documents have atso created^{charge over the immovabteproperty, i'e', atl} the piece and^parce[ of^{tand comprised in Kh No.-42l3(0.328 hect'), Kh No'-} 103/1 (0.809 Hect.),^{Kh No.-103/3 (0.809 Hect'), Kh No'-109/2 (0'862} Hect.), Kh No.-24913^{(0.255 Hect.),Kh No.-252l1(0.235 Hect'), situated at} Vittage-Sitpatti, PH No.-26,^{RIC &. Tehsit'Chhuikhadan, Distt"Rajnandgaon} (C.G.) Rin Pustika No.-P1397722,^{Totat Area-3.298Hects; belonging to} Defendant No.-1. The^{Defendant No.-'l avaited the credit facility but was}

¶18

¶19

oA 444t22

¶20

poor in repayment and the account was ctassified as NpA. The Defendants failed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Notice on 11/05121 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A'1 to A-13 which were proved by shri Mahesh Kumar, Branch Head.

¶21

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 18/03/24. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. considering the facts of the case, r opine that the Defendants are jointty and severally tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has claimed interest under Gol lnterest subvention scheme but has not specified as to whether the interest is to be serviced on monthty or quarterly or half_yearty or yearty basis. However, I feet it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @7% p.a. simpte pendentelite and future titt reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the persona[ properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶22

The Original Apptication is attowed and it is ordered as under_

¶23

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatty Rs. 34,g4,963.00 (Rupees Thirty Four Lac, Eighty Four Thousand, Nine Hundred and sixty Three onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @7% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the oA, i.e.,2gro3/22, with costs titt its reatization.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 07th Day of Aug ust,2024

¶27

A
v 9
was atel)
Presidin e Officer

Idbi Bank v. Kanhaiyalal Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Kanhaiyalal Sahu

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

State Bank of India versus Nilesh Rathore

Lokesh Chandra Agrawal versus Bank of India

Canara Bank versus Bhilai Bricks Industries

Uco Bank versus Subhash Chandra Singh

Abhimanyu Kumar Singh versus Punjab National Bank

Bank of India versus M/s Shri Keshav Poha Mill