Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Shri Wire Industries

DRT1 Oct 2024OA/905/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's origin exterior application for recovery of dues against the borrowers and guarantors. Based on the default in financial discipline and failure to clear dues after demand notice, the Tribunal imposed a repayment order on the amount claimed, granted simple interest at 12% per annum, and issued a Recovery Certificate against the mortgaged and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are ordered to pay Rs. 4,38,78,516.10 jointly and severally along with simple interest @ 12% per annum. Recovery Certificate issued under Section 19(2) of RDB Act. Defendants restrained from alienating assets without payment.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shri Wire Industries — 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 Patet)

¶4

Originol Applicotion No. - 905122

¶5

Punjab National Bank, Circle SASTRA, lndore (M.P.)

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. M/s Shri Wire lndustries, Through its Proprietor

¶9

021 Shri Pankaj Mishra, S/o Late Suresh Chandra Mishra, Proprietor of M/s Sai Wire lndustries

¶10

1. Pawan Mishra, 5/o Late Suresh Chandra Mishra

¶11

1. Hansa Mishra, W/o Pawan Mishra

¶12

1. Sunita Mishra, W/o Pankaj Mishra

¶13

(Att at 1158, Sector-A, Sudama Nagar, lndore, M.P.) Defendants

¶14

Counset for the Appticant : Shri Shreyas Dubey, Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Dated : o1't October, 2024)

¶17

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Originat Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 08107 l2Z against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 4,38,78,516.10 (Rupees Four Crore, Thirty Eight Lac, Seventy Eight Thousand, Five Hundred Sixteen and Paisa Ten onty) atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its Proprietor Defendant No.-2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Letter of Credit of Rs. 1 Crore and Cash Credit (Hypothecation of Stocks & Book Debt) Limit of Rs. 3 Crore which was enhanced to Rs. 3.50 Crore on 30/03/19 and credit facitity of Rs. 15.30 Lac on 28/05/19. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facilities the Defendant No.-1 & 2 as borrower and Defendant No.-3 to 5 as guarantors in addition to execution of

¶19

¶20

oA905122

¶21

loan and^{guarantee documents, have atso created equitabtemortgage over} the immovabte ProPerty,ⁱ 'e. ,

¶22

i) att the^{piece and parcet of Ptot No'-32, Western Part'Shree} vyapar vikash^{Parishad, Gram-Devguradiya,Tehsit& District-lndore(M.P.0,} admeasuring 5000^{sq.ft';betongingto DefendantNo'-2 and 5;} ii) Att the^piece and^{parce[of House No'-l158,Sector-A,Sudama} Nagar,lndore(M.P.),admeasuring2100sq'ft';betongingtoDefendantNo'-2 to 5.

¶23

The Defendant No.'1^{throughits Proprietor availedthe credit} facitities but did^{not comply with the financialdisciptine.The accounts} were classified as^{NPA and the Defendantsfaited to tiquidate the} outstanding dues^{despiteissuance of Demand Notice dated 13104/21uls} 13(2) of the securitisation^{Act by the AppticantBank.The Appticant-Bank} has retied upon the^{documentsat Ex.A-1 to A-20 which were proved by shri} Rajesh Bajaj, Chief^Manager.

¶24

Despite service of notice,^{the Defendants neither appeared nor} fited written statement.^{They wereproceededex-parte vide order dated} 10lo4l74. There is therefore,^{no reasonto disbetieve the contentionsof the} Bank. considering the^{facts of the case, I opinethat the Defendantsare} jointty and severa[ty tiabte to^pay the claim^{amount togetherwith interest} and costs. The^{Appticant-Bankin its apptication has ctaimedinterest @12%} p.a. with monthly rests. However,^{l feet it fair and reasonableto grant} interest @12%^{p.a. simpte pendentetiteand future till realization of the} dues.Themortgagedpropertiesareliabtetobesotdforrecoveryofamount due along with^{the personalpropertiesand assets of the Defendants'}

¶25

The Originat Apptication^{is attowed and it is orderedas under'}

¶26

i) The Defendants^{do pay jointty and severaltyRs' 4,38'78'516'10} (RupeesFourCrore,ThirtyEightLac,SeventyEightThousand,FiveHundred sixteen and^{PaisaTen onty) togetherwith pendenteliteand future interest} @127o^{per annum simptefrom the date of fiting of the OA' i'e" 08107122'} with costs ti[[^{its reatization.}

¶27

ii) The Appticant^{Bank is entitted to selt the mortgagedas wetl as} personal properties^{and assetsof the Defendantsfor reatization of its dues'} The Defendants^{are hereby restrained by means of injunctionfrom}

¶28

¶29

oA905122

¶30

depteting, transferring,^{encumbering, atienatingor in any way deating with} their properties/assets^{without first paying the ctaim of the AppticantBank.}

¶31

iii) A Recovery Certificate^{be issued uts 19(221} -^{of Recoveryof} DebtsandBankruptcyAct.Theappticantbankmayfileamemoofcost within 7 days for^{preparingRecoveryCertificate.}

¶32

Judgment^{pronouncedin the open court on this 01't Day of September,2074'}

¶33

.?-t4
.\0
tel )'
Presidine 0fficer

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Shri Wire Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Shri Wire Industries

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

Canara Bank versus M/s U.K Enterprises

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Sanman Singh

Bank of India versus Ms Saanvi Enterprises

Bank of India versus Soumiya Agency

Idbi Bank versus Sarla Singh Borkar

State Bank of India versus Uma Devi Jaiswal