Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Raja Arvind Nair

DRT28 Feb 2024OA/711/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by IDBI Bank Limited for recovery of a home loan and insurance premium totalling approx. Rs. 33.58 Lakhs. The court directed joint and several payment by the defendants ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Directed joint and several payment of Rs. 33,57,588.70 plus interest @ 7.30% p.a. within 60 days; direction to pay costs; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Idbi Bank versus Raja Arvind Nair — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

O. A. No. 711 of 2022

¶2

Registered on : 14.12.2022 Decided on : 28.02.2024

¶3

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT MUMBAI ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 711 of 2022

¶4

IDBI Bank Limited , a company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 ( 1 of 1956) and a banking company within the meaning of Section 5 (c) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) and having its Registered Office at IDBI Tower, IDBI Bank, W.T.C. Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005 and amongst others at Retail Collection & Recovery Department, Mittal Court, 2^nd Floor, “C” wing, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 through Deputy General Manager Mr. Abhishek.

¶5

...APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1. RAJA ARVIND NAIR, an adult Indian inhabitant having address at 103 Yash Apartments , Sanjau Nagar, Near Mai Niwas, Thane 400 612. Also at C/404, Sai Prerana Building, Shivaji Chowk, Lodha Hevan, Nilje, Kalyan Shill Road, Dombivali (E), Thane – 421 204. Also at Yash Construction Builders and Developers, Plot No. 1, Mumbra Reti Bunder, Opp. Rana Office, Thane – 400612.

¶8

2. SHUBHANGI GOVINDA NAIR, an adult Indian inhabitant having address at 103 Yash Apartments , Sanjau Nagar, Near Mai Niwas, Thane 400 612.

¶9

Also at C/404, Sai Prerana Building, Shivaji Chowk, Lodha Hevan, Nilje, Kalyan Shill Road, Dombivali (E), Thane – 421 204.

¶10

¶11

O. A. No. 711 of 2022

¶12

...DEFENDANTS

¶13

_____________________________________________

¶14

Counsel for the Applicant : Advocate Bhavesh Poojary i/b M/s.

¶15

MDP & Parnters.

¶16

Counsel for the Defendant : Already Ex-Parte

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

The present OA has been filed by the Applicant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 33,57,588.70/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Fifty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Seven only) with interest Base Rate 7.15% + 0.15% p.a. i.e. 7.30% p.a. (present Base Rate is 7.15% p.a., Base Rate to be reset based on extant Internal/Regulatory guidelines issued time to time) with monthly rests Plus penal interest 2% p.a. on the overdue amount from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization.

¶19

Facts as succinctly set out in the OA are that Defendant No. 1 & 2 had approached the Applicant Bank for sanction of Home Loan facility of Rs. 50 Lakhs for the purchase of the Flat No. C-404 Sai Prerana Building, Shivaji Chowk, Lodha Hevan, Nilje, Kalyan Shill Road, Dombivali (E), vide application dt.20.11.2014 and the same was sanctioned by the Applicant for Home Loan Facilities to Defendant No. 1 & 2 for a sum not exceeding Rs.32.80 Lakhs via Sanction letter dt.27.01.2015 on the terms and conditions are set out therein.

¶20

It is stated that Defendant No. 1 & 2 again approached to the Applicant bank loan for Insurance Premium of Rs.1,02,093/- as per the term and condition as set out in the sanction letter dt.27.01.2015.

¶21

It is also stated that the said Home Loan Facility and loan for Insurance premium facility was granted to the Defendants at Floting

¶22

¶23

O. A. No. 711 of 2022

¶24

rate Interest @ Base Rate i.e. 10.25% p.a. and the Home Loan of Rs.35,750/- and the loan for Insurance Premium of Rs. 1,02,093/was to be repaid in 180 Equated Monthly Instalments. As per the Applicant Bank had disbursed to the Defendants Housing Loan Facility of Rs.32.80 Lakhs and the Loan for Insurance Premium of Rs.1,02,093/- thus the total credit facility aggregating to Rs.33,82,093/-.

¶25

In order to secure the aforesaid said Home Loan facility the Defendants the following document in favour of the Applicant Bank dt.27.02.2015 :-

¶26

a. Housing Loan Agreement. b. Power of Attorney. c. Loan of Insurance Premium Agreement.

¶27

d. Undertaking to Shift.

¶28

e. Indemnity.

¶29

f. Affidavit of Home Purchase.

¶30

In order to further secure the said aforesaid Loan facilities for an amount of Rs.32.80 Lakh Defendants were executed the following document in favour of the Applicant Bank dt.27.02.2015 :-

¶31

a. Original title deeds of the Flat Sai Prerana Building, Shivaji Chowk, Lodha Hevan, Nilje, Kalyan Shill Road, Dombivali (E) executed by the Defendant No.1.

¶32

b. Memorandum of Deposit of title deeds executed by the Defendant No.1

¶33

¶34

O. A. No. 711 of 2022

¶35

c. Declaration and undertaking executed by the Defendant No. 1 & 2.

¶36

However, after availing the said Home Loan Facility, the Defendants failed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the Sanction of aforesaid Credit Facility and neglected to make the payment to the Applicant bank. Therefore, the account was declared as NPA on 08.02.2020 and further the Applicant issued the Legal Notice through its Advocate dt.20.11.2020 called upon the Defendant to make the payment of the outstanding dues but the Defendants failed to pay the dues. Hence, the present OA has been filed.

¶37

Notices were issued to the Defendants. Despite service, none appeared for the Defendants nor filed the WS thus, they were proceeded ex-parte on 20.11.2023.

¶38

The Applicant Bank has produced all the Original Loan documents and other relevant documents along with their Claim Affidavit filed on 05.10.2023 through the Manager Haresh Goheja.

¶39

I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the record.

¶40

The witness of the Applicant Bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the OA, even otherwise the whole case of the Applicant Bank is based on documents and the witness has duly proved all these documents as against the Defendants. In my view there is no question of disbelieving the evidence led by the Applicant Bank and the Applicant Bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The liability of Defendant No.1 & 2 are joint and several.

¶41

¶42

O. A. No. 711 of 2022

¶43

In the light of above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed against the Defendant No. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally.

¶44

The Applicant claiming penal interest @2% p.a. in respect of Housing loan facilities and overdraft facility however, the same is hereby decline.

¶45

O R D E R

¶46

(i) I allow the present OA and direct the Defendant No. 1 & 2 to pay to the Applicant Bank, jointly and severally, within a period of 60 days, a sum of Rs. 33,57,588.70/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Fifty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Seven only) with interest Base Rate 7.15% + 0.15% p.a. i.e. 7.30% p.a. (present Base Rate is 7.15% p.a., Base Rate to be reset based on extant Internal/Regulatory guidelines issued time to time) with monthly rests from the date of filing of the present OA till its realization.

¶47

(ii) Failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgage property and other personal moveable and immoveable assets of the Defendants.

¶48

(iii) Defendants is hereby directed not to deal with his properties till further direction of Ld. Recovery Officer.

¶49

(iv) Defendants shall also pay the cost and expenses of the OA.

¶50

¶51

O. A. No. 711 of 2022

¶52

(v) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the

¶53

Recovery Officer of this Tribunal.

¶54

Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.

¶55

File be consigned to record.

¶56

Place: Mumbai. (Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar) Date : 28.02.2024 Presiding Officer, DRT-1, Mumbai

¶57

Idbi Bank v. Raja Arvind Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Raja Arvind Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Idbi Bank versus Minal

Uco Bank versus Suhail

Uco Bank versus Amyn

Niteen Parulekar Architects Private Limited versus State Bank of India

Salil Shashikant Telang and Anr. versus State Bank of India

Idbi Bank versus Balkrishna Ramchandra Desai