Allowed

Bank of India v. Shyam Hare Sahu S/O Bhijram Sahu

DRT5 Jun 2024OA/545/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by the Bank of India for recovery of a cheque loan from the defendant. The Tribunal held the defendant liable for the principal amount, interest, and costs, and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Order for payment of Rs. 28,38,632.48 with interest at 9.65% p.a.; injunction against alienating assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of India versus Shyam Hare Sahu S/O Bhijram Sahu — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No. - 545122

¶5

Bank of lndia, Rajendra Nagar, Bitaspur (C.G.)

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shyam Hare Sahu, S/o Late Bhojram Sahu, Ravi Patanwar Cotony, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Bitaspur (C.G.) 495001

¶9

..... Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Ashish Shroti, Advocate Defendant : Ex-parte

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

lOatea^{: OfF.tune,ZOZ+;}

¶13

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 21103122 against the Defendant for recovery of Rs. 28,38,632.48 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lac, Thirty Eight Thousand, Six Hundred Thirty Two and Paisa Fourty Eight onty) atong with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 33 Lac on 28102118 and in consideration of the same the Defendant executed requisite toan documents. The Defendant avaited the credit facitity and also executed Letter of Acknowtedgment of Debt/Securities on 75102/21 but faited to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recatl Notice on22/02122 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the^documentsat Ex. A-1 to A-15 which were proved by Shri Ajay Kumar Verma,^Senior Manager.

¶15

Despite service of notice, the Defendant^{neither appearednor} fited written statement. He was^{proceededex-partevide orderdated} 19/01174. There is therefore,^{no reason to disbetieve the contentionsof the} Bank. Considering the facts of the^{case, I opinethat the Defendant is tiabte} to pay the ctaim amount together^{with interest and costs.The Appticant-}

¶16

¶17

oA s4sl22

¶18

Bank in its apptication^{has [email protected]% p.a. with monthtyrests.} However, lfeet it fair and^{reasonabteto grant [email protected]%p.a. simpte} pendentetite and future ti[[ reatization^{of the dues.The personal properties} and assets of the^{Defendantare liable to be sotd for recovery of amount} due.

¶19

The Originat Apptication^{is attowed and it is orderedas under-}

¶20

i) The Defendant do^{pay Rs. 28,38,632.48(Rupees Twenty Eight} Lac, Thirty Eight^{Thousand, Six Hundred ThirtyTwo and Paisa Fourty Eight} onty) together with^{pendentetite and future [email protected]%per annum} simpte from the date^{of fiting of the oA, i.e.,21103/22,with costs titt its} reatization.

¶21

ii) The Appticant Bank^{is entitled to setl the personal properties} and assets of the^{Defendantfor reatizationof its dues. The Defendantis} hereby restrained by^{means of injunctionfrom depleting,transferring,} encumbering, atienating^{or in any way deating with his properties/assets} without first^paying the^{ctaim of the AppticantBank.}

¶22

iii) A Recovery^{Certificate be issued u/s 19(22) of Recovery of} Debts and Bankruptcy^{Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost} within 7 days for^{preparingRecoveryCertificate.}

¶23

Judgment^{pronouncedin thb open court on this 05th Day of June, 2024'}

¶24

2h
(
r( b
(Ra )
Presidine Officer

Bank of India v. Shyam Hare Sahu S/O Bhijram Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Shyam Hare Sahu S/O Bhijram 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

Shri Sanjay Awasthi versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

Rajendra Singh Rajput versus Aspire Home Finance Corporation Ltd.

Smt Abbu Wo Shri Genda Lal versus Uco Bank

Sudarshan Deco Pvt. Ltd. versus Icici Bank Limited

Idbi Bank versus Shyam Manohar Pachori

Ms Goyal Metallics Private Limited versus Union Bank of India