Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Mugdha Devi Chandel

DRT26 Sept 2024OA/651/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This applicant filed an Original Application for recovery of dues amounting to approximately Rs. 52 lakhs as the loan was classified as NPA. The defendants failed to appear. The court allowed the application jointly and severally, directed sale of mortgaged and personal assets, and granted a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Ordered payment of Rs. 52,07,915 + interest (10% cash credit, 7.5% FITL) and costs; injunction against property alienation; Recovery Certificate issued; mortgage and personal assets made liable for sa

Idbi Bank versus Mugdha Devi Chandel — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No.^- 651 122

¶5

lDBl Bank Ltd., Bhitai, Distt.-Durg^(C.G. )

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Mugdha Devi Chandel,

¶9

01 ) W/o Shri Manrakhan Lat Chandet

¶10

1. Shri Manrakhan Lat Chandet, S/o Late Ayodhya Prasad

¶11

(Both House No.-1 57, Vittage'Hiretara, Post-Pendrawan, Tehsit-Dhamdha,

¶12

District-Durg, C.G. 491 331 ) Defendants

¶13

Counse[ for the Appticant : Shri Jagbandan Patet,^Advocate

¶14

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Oated : 26s Septernber,2O24)

¶17

The Appticant-Bank has fited the^present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on^{23105122against the} Defendants for recovery of Rs. 52,07,915.00^(Rupees Fifty Two Lac,^Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifteen onty) atong with interest and other re[iefs as stated.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1, the Appticant Bank sanctioned KCC Loan of^Rs. 46.80 lac on 13101 115 and Funded lnterest Term Loan (FITL) of Rs.22,451 l-. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facitity the Defendant No.-1 as borrower and Defendant No.-2 as guarantor in addition to execution of [oan and guarantee documents have atso created mortgage under the^provisions of M.P. Krishi Udhar Pravartan Tatha Prakriyan Upbandh (Bank) Adhiniyam 1972 over the immovable property, i.e., Agricutture Land bearing Survey No.-115 area2.75 hect.; 116 area 1.02 hect.; t20 area 1.66 hect.; 265i1 area'l .39 hect,,474 area 0.14 hect.,482 area 0.06 hect.,496 area 0.09 hect.; total area 6.61 hectare, situated at Vittage-Hiretera, Patwari Hatka No.-'14, Tehsit-Dhamdha, District-Durg (C.G.); betonging to Defendant No.^-1 .

¶19

¶20

oA 651/22

¶21

The Defendant No.-1 availed the credit facitities and also executed Revival Letter/Acknowledgment of Debt cum Revival Letter lastty on 26102121 . fhe accounts were ctassified as NPA on 17111/21 and the Defendants but faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recalt Notice on 74/03/22 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-11 which were proved by Shri Debtanu Sengupta, D.G.M. and Branch Head.

¶22

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 13/01 /23. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointty and severatly liabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has ctaimed interest at contractuaI rate but has not specified the prevaiting rate of interest. However, I feet it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @10% p.a. in cash credit account and interest @7.5% p.a. in FITL account simpte pendentetite and future titl reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶23

The Originat Apptication is altowed and it is ordered as under-

¶24

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severalty Rs. 52,07,915.00 (Rupees Fifty Two Lac, Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifteen onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @10% p.a. in cash credit account and interest @7,57o p-a, in FITL account simpte from the date of fiting of

¶25

the OA, i.e.,23/05/72, with costs titl its reatization.

¶26

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to sell the mortgaged as wett as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way deating with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶27

)

¶28

oA 651122

¶29

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The applicant bank may fite a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Cert'ificate.

¶30

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 26th Day of September,2024.

¶31

h
.9
( N s Patet)
Prqsidine Officer

Idbi Bank v. Mugdha Devi Chandel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Mugdha Devi Chandel

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

Hdfc Bank versus Shri Satendra Singh Raghuwanshi

Devesh Sharma Son of Shri Bholanath Sharma versus Laxmi Mahila Nagrik Sahakari Bank Maryadit

Hdfc Bank versus Vikas Singh Khichi

Bank of India versus Naveen Rathore

Hdfc Bank versus Go Easy Frozen Food

Bank of India versus M/S Alish Beverages Pvt. Ltd.