Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mrs Rani Devi

DRT20 Aug 2024OA/480/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The adjudicating officer allowed the applicant bank's application under Section 9 of the RDBFI Act. The court held that the defendant's liability is established by unchallenged documentary evidence, the application is within the limitation period, and issued a recovery certificate with interest.

What did the court decide?

Issued Recovery Certificate for Rs. 40,03,493.74 with pendentelitte interest; charged on hypothecated properties; directed to file cost memo.

Union Bank of India versus Mrs Rani Devi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

O A 48012022/ORI-ctrah.r

¶2

IN THE OEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, GUWAHATI

¶3

(North Eastern Reoiont

¶4

{^rnounar of Assam. Nagarand. Megharaya. Manrpur, M;zora;, Arunachar pradesh & Trpura) Beforo Shri Shiv Sharan Dubev. presidino Officer

¶5

O.A. No. 490/2022

¶6

ln the matter of -
UNION BANK OF INDIA
Lokhra Eranch,
Lokhra Road, Lokhra.
Guwahati, Assam-78,1034.

¶7

... .Applicant
Vs.

¶8

RS RANI DEVI
D/o Chandra Kanta patanoia.
South City Apartment, 3d Fbor.
BIock-A. Ghoramara, Chandan Nagar,
Guwahati-781040.

¶9

Dafendant

¶10

Pre3enc6 of tha Coungel

¶11

For the Appticant : Mr. Mukesh Sharma,
Ms. Ellora Bharali, Advocates
For the Oefendant :
None (Ex-parte)
Oated :2O108t2O24

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

This is an apprication under seclion 'r 9 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial lnstitutions Act, 1993 fited by the UNION BANK OF tNOlA, Lokhra Branch, Lokhra Road, Lokhra, Guwahati, Assam_7g1034, with a prayer to issue Recovery Certificate for the sum of Rs, 40,03,493.74p (Rup€ss Forty Laca EtghtyThree Thou3and Four Hundrod Ninety-Threo and paisa Sovonty-Four) only as on 30.09.2022 against the defendant with pendentelite and future interest at the contractuar rate per annum wath monthly rest till realization along with cost and other relief.

¶14

A few facts giving rise to the present application are as under.

¶15

The Defendant vide Loan Application dated Nil had approached the Applicant Bank and requested for grant of a Term Loan Facirity for her business. rn consideration of the said request, the applicari Bank sanctioned a Term Loan of RS.59,85,OOO/- vide

¶16

nn hf##T DRT, Guwahari

¶17

¶18

o.A. t6ozo22loRT-cuwlh.ri

¶19

Sanclion Advice dated 10.0.1.2020 to the Defendant, upon her agrceing and undertaking to compry with and abide by the tems and conditions stipurated therein. The Term Loan tacility was repayabl€ in 60 monthly installments. The loan was secured by various S€curity DocumenB exhibibd by tlefendants with interBt @ (EBLR) comprising of RBI Repo Rate spread which is presenfly g% p.a. prus premium of 17s basis points or such other rate with Monthry rests subject to changes as per rhe oire.lives of RBr/Bank poricy from time to time. The loan account stands in the name of the Defendant.

¶20

rn consideration of granting and sanclioning of lhe Term Loan Limit of Rs.59,8S,000/- to the Defendant, the Oefendant had executed D€mand pomissory Note for R3.09,80,000/-, General Term Loan Agreement (SD-18), Hypothecation of Vehicles Agreement (SD-10) (Modified); Inbrest Agreement for EBLR (SD-24), Declaration (AD_ 024) alldated i4.01.2020 in favour of tha Applicant Bank.

¶21

Since the defendanb have failed and/or neglected to remit the overdue amount, the loan account becomes NpA on 29.0g.2022 as per tha guilelines of Reserve Bank of lndia. As such lhe Applicant Bank on 05.08.2022 and O2.Og.2O22had issued a Recalt Notice, thereby demanded ths defendant to discharge his tiabitities in fu within 7 days from the date of receipt of thb notice. But the Defendant faited to discharge his liabilitbs within the stipulated period.

¶22

The Statemenb of Account mainlained by the Applicant Bank in the usual and ordinary course of business shor /s that there is an oubbnding balance of Rs. 40,83,493.74 as on 30.09.2022 in the Term Loan Account No. 76450612000007.I. The ac@unl was classilied as N.p.A. on 29.0g.2022 in adherence to the guidelines and norms as prescribed by the Reserve Bank of Therefore, the claim amount in the Loan Account is Rs.40,83,493.74 as on 30.09.2022 and the Defendant is lega y bound and liable to repay the said amount to tle Appricant Bank with interest tirr rearization with pendentelite and future lnterest, cosl and charges.

¶23

The applicant bank thus became constrained to lile the present original Application for the recovery of Rs. 40,03,493.74p (Rup3e! Forty Laca Etghty-Three Thou3and Four Hundrcd Nlnety-Throe and paisa Seventy_Four) onty as on 30.0s.2022 arons with inrerestand cosrof theapptication.

¶24

*WRfr DRT, Guwaheti

¶25

O.A. 480/202210RT-Guwahati

¶26

After filing of the OA the Tribunal issued notice upon the defendant through registered post and the applicant bank filed service report on 24.01.2023 and brought on record the postal receipt along with track consignment report which shows that the notic€ has not been served upon the sole defendant by name. Thereafter the Tribunal ordered paper publication of notice upon the sole defendant and the applicant bank issued notice to the defendant through^paper publication in two newspapers namely "The Times of lndia " and "Dainik Assam, both dated 10.02.2023. Even after issuing notice through paper publication upon the defendant there has been no representation on behalf of the sole defendant either by the counsel or the person and hence the defendant was set ex-parte on O2.OS.2O2A and the matter was posted for ex-parte hearing on behaf of the applicant bank.

¶27

Supporting the claim of the applicant bank Sri Bimal Brahma cayary, Chtef Manager of the Applicant Bank has tiled evidence on affidavit mupled with the security documents marked as Exhibit-p, Exhibit AW-i/1 to AW_1/10 supporting the claim of the applicant bank.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant bank who prayed for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant as per pleadings made in the Application, supported by evidence on afridavit of their witness who affirmed on oath the execution of the security and other document by the defendant and also execution of their own documents relied upon, which have been marked exhibits.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that the documents filed by the applicant bank are supporting the claim of the applicant bank and establishing the liabitity of the defendant. lt is prcved that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant bank the claim made in the Originat Application. The loan was obtained and documents have been executed on '14.01.2020. The account became NpA on 29.09.2022 and the OA has been filed on 30.1'1.2022. Hence, the OA is filed we within the period of timitation and this Tribunat having a jurisdiction to adjudicate the OriginatApptication.

¶30

Considering the unchallenged/ unrebutted version of Sri Bimal Brahma Gayary,

¶31

d^ilda/s^An"t ",""."""#lneft1 DRT, Guwahali^'d

¶32

¶33

o.a. 4,m/2o2zDRT€urEn.t

¶34

the applicant's witness and all the documents mafted as exhibits, lncluding duly cedmed copy of the statemenl of account along with interest calculation sheet maintainad by the appricant Bank in it's regurar course of business, r hord that the applicant is entitled io get the Recovery Certificate as prayed for.

¶35

ln the resurt, the present originar Apprication No. 4go of 2022 is alowed with cost as under :-

¶36

i) The sole defendant is liabte to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rr, {,83,493.74p (Rupoos Forty Laca Elghty_Thr€e Thous.nd Four Hund.ed Ninety-Throe and paba Sovgnty-Four) only with pendentelite and future interest @g.oo% per annum with monrhry rests from 01.10.2022 tifi the date of full paymenurealization and also cost of the application.

¶37

ii) The charge of the cerlificated amount be kept alive on hypothecated properties i.e, hypothacation of 2 Nos. of Volvo Eicher pro 6025 Tipper DW bearing Chassis No.MC2M6GRCOKLO634OB and Chassis No. MC2MOGRCDKKO63i I I as described in Schedule-A of the OA tiI the amount is roalized in full.

¶38

lii) The applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the s€cured items towards recovery of the debts.

¶39

lv) The applicant bank is also entifled to proceed against the personal assets and properties of the defendant towards recovery of the dues.

¶40

vl The applicant bank is enlifled to the costs of the O.A. which includes the advocate fe€s of the applicant bank. Applicant is directed to,ile the cost memo within 2 weeks from today.

¶41

vi) lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly for a sum Rs. /O,83,493.74p (Rupeeg Forty L.ca Elghty-Throo Thou3and Four Hundred Ninety-Throo and Pai3e Sevontyfour) only in favour of the applicant bank against the sole defendant.

¶42

vii) Communicate copy of this order to the concemed parties.

¶43

d"rtd^ "^X"tDRT cuwahari "." , 0,"n#'"{4⁽

¶44

¶45

orq_ a8ozo2zlDRl6uw.nit

¶46

This order is dictated and conected by the undersigned.

¶47

Judgment dat6d 2oth August 2024, signed and pronounced in the Tribunat

¶48

today under my signature.

¶49

copy of the JudgmsnuFinar order be uproaded in the Tribuna|s websiie and

¶50

fle b€ consigned to Record Room.

¶51

,,,,iy"*ffi#ffT Pr.3iding Officer DRT, cuwahati.

Union Bank of India v. Mrs Rani Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mrs Rani Devi

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

Punjab National Bank versus Messers Sahina Begum Laskar

State Bank of India versus Shri Deepjyoti Nath

Punjab National Bank versus Messers Goyary Oil Service

Punjab National Bank versus Sri Alok Kumar Ghosh

Bank of Baroda versus Mr Dibyajyoti Bora

Canara Bank versus Messrs Biswakarma