Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S Samrat Enterprises and Others

DRT6 Feb 2024OA/998/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal adjudicated an original application filed by HDFC Bank to recover a loan of Rs. 21.12 lakhs against sole proprietorship respondents. The Tribunal allowed the application, modified the interest rate to 10% p.a., and directed recovery via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 21,12,946.63 plus costs and 10% simple interest p.a. from filing until realization; direction to issue Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Samrat Enterprises and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.998/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 28.02.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.02.2024

¶6

HDFC Bank Ltd., a banking company, incorporated under Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at HDFC BANK House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013, Maharastra and one of its branch at GT Road, Khanna, Ludhiana through its authorized Signatory Sh. Narinder Nanda, who is duly authorized vide Board Resolution dated 30.04.2021 and presently posted as Recovery Manager at HDFC Bank Ltd., Deptt for Special Operations, HDFC Bank House, Plot No.28, 1^st Floor, Industrial Area, Phase-1, Chandigarh

¶7

…….Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. M/s Samrat Enterprises, a sole proprietorship concern, situated at Booth no.147, New Grain Market, Khanna 141401 through its Proprietor Sh. Amit Sharma son of Sh. Madan Lal (Borrower)

¶10

1. Sh. Amit Sharma son of Sh. Madan Lal resident of House no.202, Ward no.11, Mohalla Gauran, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana (Sole Proprietor/Borrower/Guarantor)

¶11

1. Ms. Shivani Vashisht daughter of Sh. Madan Lal resident of House no.202, Ward no.11, Mohalla Gauran, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana (Mortgagor/Guarantor)

¶12

1. Smt. Chand Rani wife of Sh. Madan Lal resident of House no.202, Ward no.11, Mohalla Gauran, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana (Mortgagor/Guarantor) ………Defendants

¶13

¶14

Advocates: Argued by Sh. Sumit Batra, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.21,12,946.63p (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six and Sixty Three Paisa only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Narinder Kumar Nanda, Recovery Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 16.10.2021, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its sole-proprietor defendant no.2 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of ODAP Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Loan application, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Later the defendant no.1 through its sole-proprietor defendant no.2 again approached the applicant bank for the reduction of the ODAP limit to Rs.17.00 Lacs and also for its several renewals vide Request Letters dated 28.04.2016, 12.04.2017 and 19.03.2018, which are Annexures A12, A16 and A18 to this OA. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the ODAP Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 13.06.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Later on request of the borrowers, the applicant bank reduced the ODAP limit to Rs.17.00 Lacs and renewed it several times vide Sanction Letters dated 28.04.2016, 25.04.2017 and 16.04.2018, which are Annexures A13, A17 and A19 to this OA.

¶17

¶18

Defendant nos.3 and 4 had mortgaged their immovable property i.e. Equitable mortgage of Commercial property bearing Booth no.148 measuring 25 sq. yards (00K-5/6M) situated at New Anaj Mandi, Khanna, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana, Punjab; vide Registered Sale Deed no.355 dated 23.04.2008 along with its translation, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed: - Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuing security, Master Facility Agreement, Letter of Continuing Guarantee, Memorandum recording past transactions and Deed of Indemnity all dated 17.06.2015, which are Annexures A4 to A7, A9 and A10 to this OA; Valuation Report dated 14.06.2015, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note and Amendment Agreement dated 28.04.2016, which are Annexures A14 & A15 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 25.02.2019, which is Annexure A20 to this OA; Statement of Loan Account along with the certificate, which is Annexure A21 to this OA and Interest Calculation dated 10.02.2022, which is Annexure A22 to this OA.

¶20

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.21,12,946.63p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶21

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 22.12.2023.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Narinder Kumar Nanda, Recovery Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶23

It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted,

¶24

¶25

the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A22 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.21,12,946.63p (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six and Sixty Three Paisa only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @18.00%p.a. with monthly rests in ODAP Limit from 11.02.2022 till the realization.

¶27

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @10.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,12,946.63p (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six and Sixty Three Paisa only) jointly and severally,

¶29

¶30

with costs, current and future simple interest @10.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 20.02.2024. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal Dated: 06.02.2024 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S Samrat Enterprises and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S Samrat Enterprises and Others

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

Bank of India versus Sh.Charan Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited, versus M/S Fortune Ventures and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Shiv Kumar Bagolia and Others

Uco Bank versus M/S Deep Machinery Works and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Mansa Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Shri Guru Ravidass Mission Charitable Hospital and Educational Trust and Others