Allowed

Central Bank of India v. M/S Lucky Enterprises

DRT8 Jan 2024OA/470/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application filed by Central Bank of India to recover dues of Rs. 28,13,565.89 from M/s. Lucky Enterprise. The court granted pendent lite and future interest at 9.50% per annum and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate after finding the claim well-founded and uncontroverted.

What did the court decide?

Order passed allowing Original Application No.470 of 2022, directing payment of Rs.28,13,565.89 with 9.50% interest per annum from March 5, 2020, and issuing a Recovery Certificate.

Central Bank of India versus M/S Lucky Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 05.03.2020 Registered on : 09.09.2022 Decided on : 08.01.2024 Duration : Y M D 03 10 03

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.470 OF 2022

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT : Rs.28,13,565.89

¶4

Central Bank of India a Banking Corporation constituted under the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act V,1970 and having its Central Office at Chandermukhi, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 and one of its Wadala Branch office situated at Ground Floor, Chaddha Mansion, Station Road, Wadala, Mumbai 400 031 Maharashtra through its Chief Manager, Mr Deepak Kumar Jain for and on behalf of the Applicants.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Lucky Enterprise Through its Proprietress, Mrs. Melanie Anthony Chettiar having its/her address at 103, K.T. Industrial Estate Waliv Road, Vasai (East), Dist. Thane-401 208, Maharashtra. And at Gala No.3, Munshi Compund, Behind Shell Petrol pump, Kashimira, Mira Road (East), Thane – 401107 And at Gala No.2, Kamdhenu Industrial Estate, Father Wadi, Vasai (East), District Palghar 401 208 And at Flat No.503, B-Wing, Sahyog Om Sai SRA

¶8

Page 1 of 5

¶9

Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Near Sindhi colony, ST. Frances Road, Vile Parle, (West), Mumbai – 400 056 (Maharashtra).

¶10

…Defendant

¶11

APPEARANCES

¶12

For the Applicant : Mr R.J. Singh - Advocate For Defendant : None

¶13

Shri Deepak M Thakkar Presiding Officer

¶14

HEARING : 8^th January 2024 PRONOUNCEMENT : 8^th January 2024

¶15

J U D G M E N T

¶16

(1) This is an application under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of the Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 renamed as Recovery of the Debt and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (for short, ‘the 1993 Act’) to recover Rs.28,13,565.89 with future interest thereon from the date of presentation of the Original Application till payment/realization and to enforce the hypothecated securities.

¶17

(2) Defendant carries on the business in the name and style of M/s. Lucky Enterprises as sole proprietress. Defendant is the borrower who approached the applicant to grant financial

¶18

Page 2 of 5

¶19

assistance by way of term loan facility under CGTMSE scheme and overdraft facility. On 18^th February 2017, the applicant sanctioned the term loan of Rs.20 lakhs and the overdraft facility of Rs.5 lakhs aggregating to Rs.25 lakhs. Defendant signed and executed the term loan as set out in the Original Application.

¶20

(3) After availing the credit facility, defendant did not adhere to the financial discipline and therefore, on 26^th January 2019, the applicant classified the defendant’s account as NPA. On 20^th February 2020, the applicant issued legal notice calling upon the defendant to pay Rs.27,80,758.26.

¶21

(4) As of the date preceding the filing of the Original Application, there was owing, due and payable by defendant to the applicant the aggregate sum of Rs.28,13,565.89. The applicant has maintained the loan ledger extract and the entries posted therein are made in the usual and ordinary course of the banking business.

¶22

(5) Since defendants failed and neglected to make the payment, the applicant was left with no other alternate but to file the Original Application which was presented on 5^th March 2020. Defendant was duly served with the summons and was set exparte on 10^th December 2023.

¶23

(6) The applicant has filed affidavit (exhibit-6) in lieu of examination in chief of Mr Pawan Kumar and

¶24

Page 3 of 5

¶25

list of documents (exhibit-7) thereby adducing in evidence the documents at AW-1 to AW-14, which are admitted in evidence, read, recorded and exhibited.

¶26

(7) Mr Singh submits that the applicant does not press for the 2% penal interest and hypothecated securities and therefore, the question of passing the order in this regard does not arise. The learned counsel requests to grant pendent lite and future interest at the rate of 9.50% per annum from the date of presentation of the Original Application, that is, 5^th March 2020 till payment/realisation. Request accepted.

¶27

(8) The Tribunal have scrutinised and examined the allegations contained in the Original Application and analysed the evidence adduced by the applicant which has gone unchallenged, uncontroverted and unrebutted.

¶28

(9) Upon careful scrutiny and the examination of the Original Application, analysing the evidence and giving due weightage to the documentary evidence adduced by the applicant, the Tribunal views that there is no reason to disbelieve the claim made by the applicant bank.

¶29

(10) In view of the observations made hereinabove, Original Application filed by the applicant deserves to be granted.

¶30

(11) Hence, the following order:

¶31

Page 4 of 5

¶32

ORDER

¶33

(A) The Original Application No.470 of 2022 is allowed with costs.

¶34

(B) Defendant is ordered and directed to pay to the applicant, the aggregate sum of Rs.28,13,565.89 with pendent lite and future interest at the rate of 9.50% per annum from the Original Application’s presentation date, that is, 5^th March 2020 till payment/realization.

¶35

¶36

(D) The learned Registrar is directed to send a copy of the judgment and recovery certificate to (i) the applicant, (ii) defendant by post and email and (iii) the Recovery Officer.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

(Deepak M. Thakkar) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶39

Radhika

¶40

Page 5 of 5

Central Bank of India v. M/S Lucky Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. M/S Lucky 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

Vineet Govardhan Shah versus Orix Leasing & Financial Services India Limited

Naresh Kanayalal Rajwani versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Ballers International Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Ankur Kailashchand Maheshwari versus Bharat Cooperative Bank Mumbai Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus Mandhana Industries Ltd.

Icici Bank Limited versus Dharmendra Kumar shukla

Icici Bank Limited versus Manmohan Tripathi