Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Bluepine Engicon Private Limited

DRT18 Sept 2024OA/564/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an Origin Application under S. 19 RDB Act, the Debt Recovery Tribunal determined the debt of Rs. 2.70 crores owed by M/s Bluepine Engicon and its directors to Bank of Baroda. The Tribunal allowed the application, fixed interest, and issued a recovery certificate to attach and sell assets.

What did the court decide?

The Tribunal fixed the debt at Rs. 27,081,791.30 with interest @ 8.95% p.a., issued a Recovery Certificate, and directed attachment of mortgaged assets.

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Bluepine Engicon Private… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

DRT. PATN A

OA 564 of 2022 IJ 1

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶6

OA Case No. 564 of 2022

¶7

Bank of Baroda, Lohiyanagar Branch, Oposite Shalimar Sweets, Bata Showroom Kanker Bagh Patna-20.

¶8

. . . . . . . Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s Bluepine Engicon Private Limited Situated at Flat no. 206, Shambhu Singh Mention Kaliket Nagar, Danapur, P.S.-Danapur, District-Patna801503 and Unit Address Ram Krishna Nagar, Near Patna Central School, Sardar Patel Marg Bhupatipur, District-Patna-20

¶11

Sri Sunil Kumar S/o Mr. Anil Singh, Residing at Mohalla-140, Bodh Bigha Arwal, Pin-804428 PAN no. BBSPK9127N.

¶12

Sri Sujeet Ranjan Kumar S/o Ram Hari Prasad Singh R/o Saidpur, Brahmani Temple Athauwan, Saidpur, Barh, Patna-803213 PAN no. AMBPK 1 705D.

¶13

Sri Safal Sangam S/o Sri Suresh Prasad Mehta Residing at Mohalla-Purvi Nandgola, P.S.-Malsalami, District-Patna-800008 PAN no. IKEPS2628E.

¶14

Sri Nishant Mehta S/o Sri Vidya Bhushan Kumar R/o Purvi Nandgola, P.S.-Malsalami, District-Patna-800008 PAN no. CUQPM7794F.

¶15

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶16

Present:

¶17

For the Applicant : Shri Shatrughan Prasad, Advocate For the Defendants : None

¶18

Dated:18.09.2024

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

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 19.9.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.2,70,81,791.30 as on 3 1.8.2022 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 1.9.2022 with costs till realization.

¶21

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, constituted under the banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its Head Office at Mandvi, Baroda, Gujrat and corporate office at Baroda Corporate Centre, C- 269 G-Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and

lh\’\

OA 564 of 2022 1 Jl

DRT, PATNA

Branch Office at Lohiyanagar Branch, Oposite Shalimar Sweets, Bata Showroom Kanker Bagh Patna-20

¶27

Defendant no. 1 is a Private Limited Company, defendant no. 2 to 5 are its Directors. Defendants approached the bank for grant of loan of Rs. 265 lakh, which was sanctioned by the bank on 30.9.2020. Defendants executed the various loan documents and also created mortgage of property details given at page 23 in schedule-B & C of OA.

¶28

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 18.2.2022

¶29

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.

¶30

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.2,70,81,791.30 with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 1.9.2022 till the realization.

¶31

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 17.7.2023, 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 appeared, hence, the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently, substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 1.3.2024 in “Prabhat Khabar’' newspaper.

¶32

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendants no. 1,2,3 & 5 have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants no. 1,2,3 & 5 to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, /

v IM

OA 564 of 2022 IJ I

DRT, PATN A

the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants no. 1,2,3 & 5 on 8.5.2024.

¶38

In response of defendants has appeared and filed written statement stated that the total sanction of loan was Rs.265 lakh and chargeable rate of interest is @8.7% simple as nowhere written in the sanctioned letter regarding mode of charge of interest and bank has charged higher side of rate of interest and compounded the same with monthly rests which is against the terms of sanctioned letter . It is further stated that the statement of account which is annexed in the OA is not readable and also not in proper form. In view of the above facts and circumstances the OA and claim thereof may be rejected.

¶39

However, the defendants in their written statement have not denied the sanction of loan amount, its utilization and further to secure the loan, execution of relevant documents.

¶40

Further the defendants have not substantiated the contents made in their

¶41

written statement by filing their evidence on affidavit.

¶42

As per section 19(10B) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act,

¶43

1993, “If any of the facts or pleading in the application or written statement are not verified in the manner provided under sub section (leA), a party to the proceedings shall not be allowed to rely on such facts or pleadings as evidence or any of the matters set out therein.’

¶44

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 Mukesh Kumar, Senior Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶45

	of Description Documents PhotocoDies	of Date Execution	Amount	Signature of Executants
	)		Rs.286 lakh	Defendants
	Sanction letter		Rs.365 lakh	Bank
	Attestation memo	20.10.2020		Bank
	DPnote	20.10.2020	Rs.105 lakh Rs.80lakh Rs.80lakh	Defendants
5	e		Rs.80 lakh	5 Defendants

6$\

DRT. PATNA

OA 564 of 2022 IJl

	securit
6	o hypothecation		Rs.265 lakh	Defendants	6
7	o		Rs.265 lakh	Defendants	7
8	e installment		Rs.80 lakh	Defendants	8
9	a letter			Defendants	9
10	r		Rs.265 lakh	Defendants	10
11	P		Rs.265 lakh	Defendants	11
12	t		Rs.80lakh	Defendants	12
13	t		Rs.105 lakh	Defendants	13
14	t			Defendants	14
15	t			Defendants	15
	e			Defendants
	e guarantee			Defendant no. 2&3
18	Partitiondeed				18
19	Registered mortgage				19
20	Notice	1.12.2021		a
a	account no	31.8.2022	Rs.2,70,81,791.30		21

¶51

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶52

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.

¶53

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.

t ’'OLd\

OA 564 of 2022 1 Jl

DRT, PATNA

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.

¶60

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 18.2.2022, whereas the present application has been filed on 19.9.2022. 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.

¶61

Shri Mukesh Kumar, Senior 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.

¶62

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.

¶63

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.

¶64

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.

¶65

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 admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible, but not further or otherwise.

DRT, PATNA

OA 564 of 2022 IJl

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.

¶71

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.

¶72

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 31.8.2022 has been proved to be Rs.2,70,81,791.30 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.

¶73

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.2,70,81,791.30 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 8.95 % p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 19.9.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶74

ORDER

¶75

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.2,70,81,791.30 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 8.95 % p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 19.9.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

'UP\

OA 564 of 2022 1 Jl

DRT, PATN A

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

¶82

Defendants are debarred 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.

¶83

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

¶84

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

¶85

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 18th day of September, 2024. b PM Dictated &corrected by me.me. \ \ rO-' / /Y"ig'uc'Iw

¶86

Dictated &corrected by me.me.

¶87

[KaushHendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶88

FORM NO. 9 [See Regulation 24( 1 )]

¶89

¶90

DEBTS RE(-oVER' TRI BU \ A 1. P,\TNA

¶91

+++

¶92

2nd rIot>r, ( A. B & F WlnR) Karpuri Thdkur Sadan. Kendriya Kilramchilrl Paris;ar (G POA), Ashiana Di!!ha Road. Patna-800025

¶93

RECOVERy CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 19(z) READ WITH sm:TION 19(B) or THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1293, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

¶94

.C No. 202/2024

¶95

IN Case No: OA/564/2022

¶96

In the Matter of

¶97

(CH- 1) BANK ( )F BAR(_)DA LOHl''AN AGAR BRANCH. OPPOSITE SHALIM AR SWEETS. BATA SHC)WROC)M KANKER BAGH

¶98

Applicant(s )

¶99

PATN A .BIHAR -800020

¶100

¶101

(CD- 1) MS BLUEPINE ENGICON PRIVATE LIMITED sltllatccl at Flat no- 206. Shambhu Singh SIngh Men!;Ion Killiket Nilg3r. Ditnapul- P.S.- Dallapul-. DIstrict- Piltllil bt J 1 503.L;11til Address RaIn Krishna Nagar near Piltnu Central School Sardill' Patel N4ill'g Bhupatipul Pillna ,BIHAR

¶102

(CD- 2) SRI SUNIL KUMAR S/( ) MR. ANIL SINGH, RESIDING AT MOHALLA-140, BODH BIGH A. ARWAL, PIN- 804428

¶103

(CD- 3) SRI SUJEET RANJAN KUMAR S''U RAM HARI PIt'\SAD SINGH, R/O SAIDPI JR, BRAHM ANI TEMPLE ATI-IALJWAN, SAIDPUR. BARN P/TFN A- 803: 13

¶104

Defendant(s )

¶105

(CD- 4) SRI SAFAL SANGAM S/O SRI SURESH PRASAD MEHTA, RESIDING AT MC)HALLA- 1'URVI NANDG OLA. P.S.- MALSALAMI DISTRI (’T- PATN A- 800008

¶106

(CD- 5) SRI NISHANT MEHTA S/U SRI VIDYA BHIJSHAN KUMAR, R/O PURVI NANDGOLA. P.S.- MALS AL,AMI, DISTRICT- PATNA80( )f )f )8

¶107

Recovery Certificate for Rs 27081791.30 1 Rupees Two Crore Seventy L:rkhs EigUy One Thousands Seven Hundred Ninety One And Pajge Thirty Only I

¶108

In terms of fInal order dated 18/09/2024 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. 27081791.30 along with cost, expenses and interest horn the 19/09/2022 i.e. date ot-H ling / with effective date of the OA/564/2022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors. hereinafter referred to as:-

¶109

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the nrortgaged/hypc)thecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.

¶110

The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question tire hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certiflcatc issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993

¶111

I’allies are directed to appear before MANOJ KUMAR , Rectlvel'y OfReer. DEB'FS REC"OVER\’ TRIBUNAL I)ATNA oil 04/ I1/2024.

¶112

The Recovery Oftlcer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amended from time to time) from the above named CertifIcate Debtors

¶113

This Certificate has been issued under my signature antI seal of the Tribunal on this 9/09/2024

¶114

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶115

PII I had

¶116

FORM NO. 10

¶117

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶118

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶119

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

¶120

Ashiana Drgha Road, Patna-800025.

¶121

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 202/2024

Case No: OA/564/2022

Applicant(s): BANK OF BARODA Versus

¶126

Defendant(s): MS BLUEPINE ENGICON PRIVATE LIMITED

¶127

Sr. No	hem ofCosts	lountinR&
	Feeontheapplication	m5
2	r	Fo I........
	AdvocateFees	,
	Commissioner/Receiver/Valuation/SecurityFee
5	v'’liscellaneous Charges	Fii
	'otal Costs:Rs	150000

¶128

Place: PATNA

¶129

Date: 1 9/09/2024

¶130

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶131

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Bluepine Engicon Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Bluepine Engicon Private Limited

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

Mujeeb Rahman v K versus Manjeri Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd.

Abdul Kareem Haji Keyath versus Manjeri Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Natubhai

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Maa Jagdamba Traders

Axis Bank versus Sh. Navneet Gulati

Uco Bank versus M/S Dreams Plus Consulting Pvt. Ltd.