Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S/ Shubhlakshmi Logistics, Prop. Karan Singh

DRT6 Aug 2024OA/872/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank of Baroda filed a debtor recovery tribunal application seeking recovery of Rs. 60.38 Lakhs as an overdraft loan against M/s Shubhlakshmi Logistics and its proprietor. The respondents did not appear. The tribunal allowed the application and awarded adjusted recovery.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 59.19 Lakhs plus future interest at 9% per annum.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S/ Shubhlakshmi Logistics… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 07.11.2017 Registered on: 10.10.2022 Decided on: 06.08.2024 Duration: Y M D 06 08 29

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.872/2022.

¶3

Bank of Baroda ,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at Baroda House, Mandavi, Baroda-390 006, having its Regional Office at 2^nd Floor, Sharda Centre, 11/1, Khilare Path, Erandawane, Pune-4 and Branch office at Pride Purple Square, Survey No.210, Kalewadi Chowk, Wakad, Pune-57.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. M/s Shubhlakshmi Logistics Proprietor – Mr. Karan Singh Office – Office No.2, 2^nd floor, Esteem Tower, Bombay-Pune Road, Pimpri, Pune-411 018.

¶8

Mr. Karan Singh Proprietor – M/s Shubhlakshmi Logistics, Office - Office No.2, 2^nd floor, Esteem Tower, Bombay-Pune Road, Pimpri, Pune-411 018.

… Defendants

(OA No.872/2022)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

APPEARANCES For the Applicant For Defendants

¶14

Mr. M. D. Kulkarni Ex parte.

¶15

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.60,38,140.97Ps. JUDGMENT

¶16

(Delivered on 6^th August, 2024)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery certificate of Rs.60,38,140.97Ps with further interest thereof from 11.10.2017 @3% as agreed in respect of Term Over Draft Loan Account No.46180200000308 alongwith penal interest @3% thereon as claimed in particulars of claim.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

Defendant No.2 is Sole Proprietor of Defendant No.1 – M/s Shubhalakshmi Logistics carrying out business of Transporting Industrial Goods, Machinery on large scale basis throughout India. Defendant No.2 approached the Applicant Bank on 09.12.2015 and requested to sanction Term Over Draft of Rs.9,00,000/- against the clearing of cheaques.

¶20

The Applicant Bank considered the said request and sanctioned from time to time Term Over Draft of Rs.45,00,000/-, to the Defendants. The Defendants assured

(OA No.872/2022)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

the clearing of the said Term Over Draft within few days i.e. end of 2015. Instead of clearing the outstanding dues against the said TOD, submitted a proposal for sanction of Rs.25,00,000/-, which the Applicant Bank did not consider.

¶25

It is contended by the Applicant Bank that irrespective of agreed terms and conditions, Defendants have not cleared the said Term Over Draft within stipulated period. So, the Applicant Bank issued letters dated 01.02.2016, 07.04.2016, 02.05.2016 and 20.05.2016 to the Defendants and asked them to clear the overdraft without further delay.

¶26

The defendants have acknowledged their indebtedness to Applicant Bank by executing specified letters addressed to Branch Manager and confirmed that the amount due was secured in full force and effect.

¶27

The Applicant Bank further submits that Term Over Draft Loan Account of the defendant became Non Performance Assets on 16.05.2016. Therefore, Applicant Bank issued Legal Notice on 30.06.2017 through Advocate M. D. Kulkarni to the defendants and called upon them to pay the outstanding loan amount of Rs.56,21,375/-. The notice issued to the defendants was returned with an endorsement as “Left”.

¶28

Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.872/2022)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

Defendants have failed to appear in the proceeding. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 29.04.2024 passed below the Application (Exhibit-01).

¶33

The Applicant Bank filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Pravinkumar Bhimrao Hingole, Senior Manager, which supports the case of the applicant elucidated in the application.

¶34

The Applicant Bank has produced in evidence the loan documents at Exhibits AW-1 to AW-14, which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶35

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the Applicant Bank.

¶36

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Applicant Bank. Therefore, the Applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

¶37

The Applicant Bank has claimed other charges Rs.1,03,647/and expenses of Typing, Notice and Xerox of Rs.15,000/-, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.60,38,140.97Ps. is reduced to Rs.59,19,493.97Ps.

(OA No.872/2022)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

10 The Applicant Bank in the pleading has claimed interest @16.9% and penal interest @3%. Considering the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that if interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for all the loan facilities, it would be just and reasonable.

¶42

11 Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(A) Original Application No.872/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶45

(B) Defendant Nos.1&2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the Applicant Bank sum of Rs.59,19,494/(Rupees Fifty Nine Lakhs Ninteen Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Four only) with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 07.11.2017 till payment /realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶46

¶47

(D) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶48

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Place: Pune Presiding Officer, Date: 06.08.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

(OA No.872/2022)

Page 5 of 5

[ANIL]

[ANIL] (OA No.872/2022) Page 6 of 5

Bank of Baroda v. M/S/ Shubhlakshmi Logistics, Prop. Karan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S/ Shubhlakshmi Logistics, Prop. Karan Singh

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

Federal Bank versus Amarshing Phadnaik

State Bank of India versus Sanjay Shinde

Uco Bank versus Ranjit Narute

Bank of Baroda versus Rajesh Panghal

Uco Bank versus Kamlabai Bansode

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Zenith Stone Industries