Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Vinita Prajapati W/O- Rakesh Prajapati

DRT15 Mar 2024OA/951/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DrT allowed the Debts Recovery Tribunal's original application for recovery of dues. The applicant Bank claimed the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 36,17,221.98 with interest at 10% per annum simple, along with costs. A recovery certificate was directed and an injunction granted against disposal of assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 36,17,221.98 with interest at 10% p.a. simple; Recovery Certificate issued; Injunction granted against disposal of assets.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Vinita Prajapati… — 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

Original Applicotion No. - 951122

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 5, Yashwant Niwas Road, lndore (M.P.)

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Vinita Prajapati, W/o Shri Rakesh Prajapati

¶9

Rakesh Prajapati, S/o Shri Shankar Lal

¶10

(Both R/o Bhojpuri Cotony, Katti Bittod, Tehsit-Depatpur, District-lndore, M.P. 4531 1 5)

¶11

..... Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Arun K. Pandey , Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶13

JUDGMENT loatea^{:T5ffi lrtarcfr,zozal}

¶14

The Appticant-Bank has fited the^present Originat^Apptication uts 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act^{on 30107122against the} Defendants for recovery of Rs. 36,17,221.98^{(Rupees Thirty Six Lac,} Seventeen Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty^One and^{PaisaNinety Eight onty)} atong with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶15

The brief facts of the case are that on the^{request of} Defendant No.-1 and 2, the Appticant^Bank sanctioned^{Housing Loanof Rs.} 22Lacon23l12t19, SBI Home top^Up Term^{Loan of Rs. 8 Lac on 23101120} and and SBI Suraksha Loan of Rs. 1.40 tac^{on 18102120.ln considerationof} the sanction of credit facitities the Defendants^{in addition to execution of} loan documents have atso created equitabte^{mortgageover the immovabte} property, i.e., Ptot No.-36, Patwari Hatka No.-37,^{admeasuringPtot area} 1000 sq.ft. situated at Katyan^{Sampat Green,Gram-KaliBittod,Tehsit-} Depatpur, district-lndore^{(M.P.). TheDefendantsavaited the credit facitities} but faited to tiquidate the outstanding^{dues despite issuance of Legal Notice} on 09107122 and initiation of^{action under the SecuritisationAct by the}

¶16

¶17

oA95y22

¶18

Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex A-1 to A-23 which were^proved by Shri Sanjay Mehta, Chief Manager.

¶19

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were^proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19108123. 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 severatty tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has ctaimed interest @9.90y, p.a., 10.25Yo p.a., 9.90/o p.a. with monthty rests in respect of housing [oan, SBI Top-up and SBI Suraksha respectivety. However, ! feel it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @10% p.a. simpte for att the three accounts pendentetite and future titl reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is liabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶20

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

¶21

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatty Rs. 36,17,221.98 (Rupees Thirty Six Lac, Seventeen Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty One and Paisa Ninety Eight onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @10% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e. , 30107122, with costs titt its realization.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 15th Day of March, 2024.

¶25

<br>1l 2
(Ra m iwas Patet)
Presidine Officer

State Bank of India v. Smt. Vinita Prajapati W/O- Rakesh Prajapati

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Vinita Prajapati W/O- Rakesh Prajapati

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

Neeraj Singh Son of Shri Keshav Pratap Singh versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Vinay Kumar Dubey versus Srg Housing Finance

Ms Vasunil Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus Moolchand Kushwaha

Cent Bank Home Finance Limited versus Sujeet Shasmal

Cent Bank Home Finance Limited versus Shri Syed Mohammad Yahya