Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Prakash Shrimant Gouraj, Prop. M/S. Prakash Shrimant Gouraj

DRT4 Oct 2024OA/995/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues admitted in default. The tribunal granted principal amount reduced by penal interest and fraudulently adjusted future interest at a rate of 9% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Defendant ordered to pay Rs. 22,87,398.43 with future interest at 9% p.a. and issue of Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank versus Prakash Shrimant Gouraj, Prop. M/S. Prakash… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 13.03.2020 Registered on: 05.09.2020 Decided on: 04.10.2024 Duration: Y M D 04 06 21

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE. (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.995/2022.

¶3

HDFC BANK LIMITED ,

¶4

Banking Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered office at HDFC Bank House, C.S.No.6/242, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai and having Branch Office at Department for Special Operations, Peninsula Business Park, B-Wing, 4^th Floor, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400 013.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Prakash Shrimant Gauraj Proprietor –M/s Prakash Shrimnat Gauraj R/at –Ward No.10/1132, Rajrajeshwari Nagar, Ichalkaranji, District-Kolhapur.

¶8

…Defendant

¶9

APPEARANCES

¶10

For the Applicant Advocate – Mrs. Tejashri Y.Hirve. For the Defendant Ex parte

¶11

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 24,15,811.93Ps.

(OA No.995/2022)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 4^th October, 2024)

¶16

Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of sum of Rs.24,15,811.93Ps. together with future interest @11.25% p.a. with monthly rests under Loan A/c No.50200009604402 from the date of filing of the Original Application till payment and or repayment/ realization from the Defendant.

¶17

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶18

Defendant is engaged in the business of manufacturing of Textiles under name and style as M/s Prakash Shrimant Gauraj. Defendant approached the Applicant Bank on 16.12.2014 and requested for financial assistance by way of Cash Credit of Rs.20,00,000/-. Accordingly, the Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant and sanctioned Cash Credit Facility of Rs.20,00,000/- for business purpose on 03.01.2015, on certain terms and conditions.

¶19

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facility, the Defendant has signed and executed loan and security documents as set out in Para No.5.7 of the Original Application, in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant availed and utilized said Cash Credit Facility vide Loan A/c No.50200009604402.

(OA No.995/2022)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

It is contended that the Applicant Bank renewed said Cash Credit Facility of R.20,00,000/- vide Renewal Sanction Letter dated 16.12.2015. Again on the request of Defendant, the Applicant Bank renewed said Cash Credit Facility on 26.12.2017 & 08.01.2019. It is contended that renewal sanction terms were duly accepted and acknowledged by the Defendant.

¶24

It is further contended that the Defendant has created an exclusive first charge on stocks and book debts vide letter of hypothecation dated 05.01.2015, in favour of the Applicant Bank, as described in the Schedule of Original Application.

¶25

The Applicant Bank contended that the Defendant was irregular in repayment of the said Facility/Loan. The Applicant repeatedly requested Defendant to repay the loan as agreed, but the Defendant deliberately and knowingly failed to repay the same. Therefore, the said loan account of the Defendant became NPA on 31.03.2019.

¶26

Applicant Bank contended that looking into the regular defaults committed by the Defendant, the Applicant Bank has issued Recall Notice dated 24.02.2020 to pay the outstanding amount. But the Defendant failed to pay the said outstanding amount. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.995/2022)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

The Defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per order dated 21.06.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶31

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit (Exhibit-6) of Mr.Ashwin Indulkar, Senior Manager and produced on record the Loan Transaction documents at Exhibits.AW-1 to AW-20, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

8 . The Applicant Bank has claimed penal interest (Simple) of Rs.1,28,413.50 Ps., which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.24,15,811.93Ps is reduced to Rs.22,87,398.43Ps .

¶35

The Applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets. Therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

(OA No.995/2022)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank has claimed interest @11.25% p.a. for Loan Account No.50200009604402 availed by the Defendant. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9.00% p. a. (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶40

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(A) Original Application No.995/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶43

(B) Defendant shall pay sum of Rs.22,87,398.43Ps (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Eight and Fourty Three Paise only) with future interest @ 9.00% p. a. (simple), from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.13.03.2020 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

¶44

¶45

(D) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the Applicant Bank and the Defendant.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

Place : Pune (Dilip G. Murumkar) Date: 04.10.2024 Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶48

(OA No.995/2022)

¶49

Page 5 of 5

¶50

[ANIL]

Hdfc Bank v. Prakash Shrimant Gouraj, Prop. M/S. Prakash Shrimant Gouraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Prakash Shrimant Gouraj, Prop. M/S. Prakash Shrimant Gouraj

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

Uco Bank versus Dyaneshwar Thombare

Uco Bank versus Kundalik Shinde

Bank of India versus Babasaheb Rakh

Bank of Baroda versus Abusab Gabsavalgi

Bank of Maharashtra versus Dilip Jagtap

Canara Bank versus Subhash