Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar

DRT18 Sept 2024OA/578/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 19 of the RD Act, 1993, HDFC Bank sought recovery of Rs.20.52 lakhs from borrowers and a guarantor after default. The Tribunal adopted an ex-parte order, calculated interest, and issued a Recovery Certificate allowing the bank to recover dues jointly and severally.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.20,52,158.16 with future interest payable jointly and severally; assets attached and prohibited from transfer.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Rajesh Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

OA 578 of 2022 IJl

DRT, PATN A

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶6

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶7

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶8

OA Case No. 578 of 2022

¶9

HDFC Bank Ltd., 2"d Floor Rajendra Ram Plaza Exhibition Road, Patna- 1

¶10

. . . . . . . Applicant

¶11

Vs.

¶12

Rajesh Kumar S/o Upendra Singh Address Gram Kochgawan, PostKochgown, Nawada, District-Nawada, Pin-805130

¶13

Rakesh Kumar S/o Upendra Singh Address - Gram Kochgawan, PostKochgown, Nawada, District-Nawada, Pin-805130

¶14

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶15

Present:

¶16

For the Applicant Shri Bhola Shankar, Advocate For the Defendants None

¶17

Dated : 18.09.2024

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

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 21.10.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.20,52,158.16 as on 11.8.2022 along with pendente-lite and future interest @11.65% in business loan and @9.65% in GECL loan from 12.8.2022 with costs till realization.

¶20

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, under the companies Act 1956 carrying on banking business under License Granted by RBI and registered under banking regulation Act 1949 having its registered office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 and one of its Branch Office at 2nd Floor Rajendra Ram Plaza Exhibition Road, Patna- 1

¶21

Defendant no. 1 is individuals who obtained credit facilities in respect of commercial equipment retail loan on personal capacity from the bank and defendant no. 2 is guarantor of loan obtained by defendant no. 1. Defendant no. I approached the bank for grant of loan of Rs.19,32,784/- on 26.6.2019, which was sanctioned by the bank on 10.7.2019. Defendants further approached the

$ V\

OA 578 of 2022 1 Jl

DRT, PATN A

bank for grant of GECL loan of Rs.3.49 lakh, which was sanctioned by the bank on 2 1.9.2020. Defendants executed the various loan documents.

¶27

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 4.6.202 1

¶28

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.

¶29

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.20,52,158.16 with pendentelite and future interest @11.65% in business loan and @9.65% in GECL loan from 12.8.2022 till the realization.

¶30

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 27.12.2022, 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 16.3.2023 in “Dainik Jagaran” newspaper.

¶31

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 14.8.2023 .

¶32

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 Swapan Patra, Legal Manager of the applicant bank. The details of dOCume;Its are as follows:

Lj\

OA 578 of 2022 IJl

DRT, PATNA

e	of Documents Photocopies	1 Dateof IExecution	Amount	Signature of Executants	1Ex./ IAnn. No
no	r			e
o		s	e	aa
3	GECLsanction letter	21.9.2020	Rs.3.49 lakh	)
4	Undertaking	21.9.2020		e 1
5	Hypothecation agreement	21 .9.2020		e 1
6	e undertakin	21 .9.2020		e
7	o	16.8.2022			7
a	account m	os 11.8.2022	2:		8

¶38

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶39

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.

¶40

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.

¶41

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. \

OA 578 of 2022 1 Jl

DRT, PATNA

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 4.6.202 1, whereas the present application has been filed on 21.10.2022. 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.

¶46

Shri Swapan Patra, Legal 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.

¶47

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.

¶48

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.

¶49

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.

¶50

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.

¶51

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. \ _ , L \ T>C'\

OA 578 of 2022 IJl

DRT, PATNA

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 .

¶56

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 11.8.2022 has been proved to be Rs.20,52,158.16 only by way of statement of account. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed 8 in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶57

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.20,52,158.16 along with pendente-lite and future interest @9.65% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 21.10.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶58

ORDER

¶59

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.20,52,158.16 along with pendente-lite and future interest @9.65% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 21.10.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶60

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

¶61

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any

v{$n

OA 578 of 2022 1 Jl

DRT, PATNA

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.

¶68

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.

¶69

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

¶70

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 18th day of September, 2024.

¶71

h ".P

¶72

\ =L L L a ]q=> = V\ P !A [KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶73

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶74

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

¶75

DEBTS RECOVER\’ TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶76

2nd Floor. { A. B & F Wing) Karpuri ThaI<ur Sadan. Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA). Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025

¶77

RECOVER' CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 19(Z) READ WITH SECTION 19(B) OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1993, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

¶78

RC No. 200/2024 IN

¶79

Case No: OA/578/2022

¶80

III the Matter of: (CH- 1) HDF C- BANK LTD 2ND FLOOR RAJENDRA RAM PLAZA EXHIBITION ROAD PATN A .BIHAR -800001

¶81

Applicant(s)

¶82

-–--- Versus ----–-

¶83

’I-o (CD- 1) RAJESH KUMAR S/o Upendra Singh Address Gram Kochgawan. Post- l<ochgown. N a\’ada Nawada .BIHAR -805 1 30

¶84

Defendant(s)

¶85

(CD- 2) RAKESH KUMAR

¶86

S/0 UPENDRA SINGH ADDRESS - GRAM KOC'I]GAWAN POST- KOC’HGOWN, NAWAD A,

¶87

DISTRICT- N AWA DA, PIN - 805 1 30

¶88

Recovery CertifIcate for Rs 2052158.16 1 Rupees Twenty Lakhs Fifty Two Thousands One Hundred Fifty Eight And Paise Sixteen OnI}LI

¶89

In terms of tlna] 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. 2052158.16 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 21/10/2022 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the OA/578/2022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors. hereinafter referred to as

¶90

r.no! CD Name	Lou le	Int ! Type/Mode	Int IRate	Effective te	! Order Date	IAm,„„t(R,.) ••	Liabili 'pe	ntercst as0 Irder	RC F Amount(Rs.)	Rem
ItAJESll KUMAR		111 Interest	65	1/10/2022:	i18/09/2024	12052158.1(,	intly .nd	lerest As Date	:052158.16
RAKESH KUMAR		Ftnterest	65	12 1/10/2022	}18/09/2024	12052158,16	Fointly ,nd :vcraIly		:052158.16

¶91

In case of failure to p,ly the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 ddys, same shall be recovered from the sale of the morLgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors

¶92

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 proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery cenitlcate issued under Section 1 9(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993. Parties are directed to appear before MANOJ KUMAR , Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 04/ 1 1/2024.

¶93

The Recovery OffIcer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Scctions 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 Dcbtors

¶94

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 19/09/2024

¶95

fr/ Registrar Debts Recovery Tribunal Pataa

¶96

PRESF£lrRG OFFICER DEBTS RE('OVERY TRiBUNAL PATNA

¶97

FORM NO. 10 [See Regulation 24(2)]

¶98

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶99

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

¶100

Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025 .

¶101

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 200/2024

Case No: OA/578/2022

Applicant(s): HDFC BANK LTD. Versus

¶106

Defendant(s): RAJESH KUIVIAR

¶107

Sr. No.	Fltemof Costs	mountinRs
	Feeonthe application	hoon
	ProcessFees(Inc.Publication)	he
	AdvocateFees	ro
	Commissioner/Receiver/Valuation/SecurityFee	h
	MiscellaneousCharges
	TotalCosts:Rs	mo

¶108

Place: PATNA

¶109

Date: 19/09/2024

¶110

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶111

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar

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.