Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Narayan Construction Company

DRT27 Aug 2024OA/889/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte proceeding under the RDB Act, the Tribunal allowed Kotak Mahindra Bank's application for recovery of Rs. 96.12 lakhs plus interest, ordered a Recovery Certificate, and issued an injunction against the respondents disposing of assets.

What did the court decide?

Ordered payment of Rs. 96.12 lakhs with interest, issued Recovery Certificate, and granted injunction against disposal of assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Narayan… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'ble Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶4

Original Application No.^- 889122

¶5

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., 15th Ground Ftoor, Dhand Compound, Behind Police Headquarter, Civil Lines, Gwatior (M.P.) 492001

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Narayan Construction^Company

¶9

Shri Om^PrakashGupta

¶10

Shri Chetan Prakash Gupta

¶11

(Att at E-9, Chetak Puri, Jhansi Road, Gwatior,^{M.P. 474009)}

¶12

..... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Appticant :^{Shri Adamya Bajpai,Advocate} Defendants : Ex-Parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Oatea : 2Trlugust, 20241

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited^{the present OriginalApptication} u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and^{BankruptcyAct on 14107122 against the} Defendants for recovery of^{Rs. 96,12,864.65(Rupees Ninety Six Lac, Twetve} Thousand, Eight Hundred Sixty^{Four and Paisa Sixty Five onty) atong with} interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are^{that on the request of} Defendant No.-1 and 2, the Appticant^{Bank sanctioned TermLoan of Rs.} 58,57,700/- and another Term^{Loan of Rs.34.67 Lac on 31105118, Term} Loan of Rs.46,1O,7OOt- and Term^{Loan of Rs. 13.36 Lac. ln considerationof} the sanction of credit facitities^{the Defendant No.'1and 2 borrowers and} Defendant No.-3 as^guarantor executed^{requisiteloan documents from time} to time. The Defendant No.-1 and^{2 avaited the credit facitities but did not} pay the instattments in the accounts. The accounts^{becameirregutarand} the Defendants faited to tiquidate^{the outstanding dues despite issuanceof} Legat Notice on 19l01 t27 by the^{Appticant Bank. The Appticant'Bankhas}

¶18

¶19

oA889122

¶20

retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to^{A'34 which were proved by Shri} Krishan Nidhi Pandey, Asstt. Legat Manager.

¶21

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither^{appeared nor} fited written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte^{vide order dated} 21105124. There is therefore, no reason to^{disbetieve the contentionsof the} Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants^are jointty and severatty tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has claimed interest @8.57% p.a. with monthty rests. However, I feet it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @8.57% p.a. simpte pendentelite and future titt reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is liabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due along with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶22

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

¶23

i) The Defendants do pay^jointty and severatty Rs. 96,12,864.65 (Rupees Ninety Six Lac, Twetve Thousand, Eight Hundred Sixty Four and Paisa Sixty Five onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @8.57% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e. , 14107122, with costs titt its reatization.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 27th Day of August, 2024.

¶27

o9'
Patet)
Presidine Officer

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Narayan Construction Company

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Narayan Construction Company

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

Mohan Lal Patel versus Assets Care

Rupesh Saraf versus Aditya birla Huosing Finance Ltd.

Shailendra Singh Solanki S/o. Shri Manohar Singh Solanki versus Punjab National Bank

Manoj Son of Shri Vishnu Lal Soni versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Seema Sahu versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Arvind Oil