Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Messrs Bajrang Motors and Others

DRT7 Dec 2024OA/583/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of RDBFI Act 1993 against borrowers for recovery of Rs.40,89,912.28. The court standardized the interest rate to 7.85% p.a. and ordered issuance of a recovery certificate, permitting enforcement via sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.40,89,912.28 with simple interest @07.85% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; recovery via sale of mortgaged or personal assets permitted.

Bank of Baroda versus Messrs Bajrang Motors and Others — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.583/2023 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.03.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 07.12.2024

¶5

Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank) a Body Corporate, with perpetual succession constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act of 1970 having its Registered Head Office at Baroda Bhawan, R.C. Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390007, Gujarat and Branch Office at various places in India and overseas, including a branch at B-XXX, 1626-C, Sherpur Road, Behind Aarti Steels, Focal Point, Ludhiana through Sh. Jainendra Kumar Katyayan, Senior Branch Manager and Constituted Attorney.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Bajrang Motors, through its proprietor Sh. Rahul Monga, Shop No.21, Jai Singh Complex, Link Road, Opposite Preet Palace Cinema, Ludhiana.

¶9

Sh. Rahul Monga S/o Sh. Rajesh Monga Prop. M/s Bajrang Motors R/o H.No.1053, Friends Colony, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana.

¶10

Mrs. Neha Monga Wife of Sh. Rahul Monga R/o R/o H.No.1053, Friends Colony, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana.

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Present Sh. Sukhvinder Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.40,89,912.28p (Rupees Forty Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Twelve and Twenty Eight Paise only). The Original Application

¶16

¶17

has been filed through Sh. Jainendra Kumar Katyayan, Senior Branch Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 17.06.2009, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant No.1 through its Prop. i.e. defendant No.2 had approached the applicant for the grant of WCTL of Rs.27.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 17.01.2017, is Annexure A4 to this OA. Further approached the applicant for Term Loan (FITL) of Rs.2,57,544.00 and BGECL of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Loan Applications dated 24.12.2020 & 18.07.2020, which are Annexure A15 and A21 to this OA. Later approached the applicant for Term Loan of Rs.2,57,544.00 vide Loan Application dated 24.12.2020, which is Annexure A29 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned WCTL of Rs.27.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 17.01.2017, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Further applicant sanctioned Term Loan from time to time vide sanction Letters dated 30.12.2020, which are Annexures A16 & A30 to this OA and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendant no.2 had hypothecated his movable properties i.e. House-cum-Plot No.1053, Measuring 117 Sq. Yards situated at Village Bholapur, Hadbast No.238, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Equitable mortgage of Sale Deed bearing vasika no.3000 dated 26.03.2015, detail of mortgage property and Jamabandi for the year 2015-16 along with their translation which are Annexures A9, A35, A36, A37 & A38 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed:- Gazette Notification which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA; Loan Agreement cum Hypothecation Agreement, Memorandum of Entry, Letter of Undertaking, all dated 17.01.2017, which are Annexures A6 to A8 & A10 to this OA; Letter of Cash Credit Facility, Supplementary Agreement and Acknowledgment of Liability all dated 17.03.2018, which are Annexures A11 to A13 to this OA; Letter of Acknowledgment of Debts dated 02.12.2019, which

¶22

¶23

is Annexure A14 to this OA; DP Note, Letter of Installment with Acceleration, Documents to be obtained from the Guarantor, Agreement for re-schedulement-cum-funded interest term loan all dated 30.12.2020, which are Annexures A17 to A20 to this OA; Letter (Annexure-V), DP Note, General Form of Guarantee, Declaration-cum-undertaking-cum-Authority Letter all dated 24.07.2020, which are Annexures A22 to A25 to this OA; Letter of Acknowledgement of Debt dated 19.10.2022, which is Annexure A26 to this OA; Loan-cum-hypothecated Agreement-cum-Authority Letter dated 24.07.2020, which is Annexure A27 to this OA; Request Letter dated 25.09.2020, which is Annexure A28 to this OA; DP Note, Letter of Installment with acceleration clause, Document to be obtained from the Guarantor and Agreement for re-schedulement-cum-funded interest Term Loan all dated 30.12.2020 which are Annexures A31 to A34 to this OA; Statement of Account along with certificate, which are Annexures A39 to A43 to this OA; List of Misc. expenses which is Annexures A44 to this OA; Valuation Report which is Annexure A45 to this OA; Notice U/s 13(2) dated 05.04.2021, along with Postal receipts which are Annexures A46 to A49 to this OA; Possession Notice dated 20.09.2021, which are Annexures A50 to A53 to this OA; DM Permission with English Version and Sale Notice Punjabi and English which are Annexures A54 to A57 to this OA . 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.40,89,912.28p which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 02.04.2024.

¶24

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jainendra Kumar Katyayan, Senior Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda has been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A57 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.40,89,912.28p (Rupees Forty Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Twelve and Twenty Eight Paise only), jointly and severally, along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.25%p.a. in respect of WCTL, interest @9.45%p.a. in respect of FITL, interest @7.85%p.a. in respect of BGECL & interest @10.85%p.a. in respect of FITL with monthly rests from 12.03.2023 till the realization.

¶26

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @07.85%p.a. in

¶27

¶28

the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.40,89,912.28p (Rupees Forty Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Twelve and Twenty Eight Paise only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @07.85%p.a. in the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶30

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.01.2025.

¶33

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶34

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶35

Dated: 07.12.2024

¶36

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶37

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of Baroda v. Messrs Bajrang Motors and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Messrs Bajrang Motors and Others

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

Bank of India, versus M/s Uspc Enterprises Hosiery Complex and Another

Bank of Baroda, versus M/s G.S. Broiler Farm and Another

Canara Bank versus M/s Nirmal Industries and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Amrik Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Raghvir Singh

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/s Hamchiri Car Palace and Others