Allowed

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hyderabad) v. Sh. Ankur Patahak

DRT24 Dec 2024TA/1115/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act. The court issued a recovery certificate directing the recovery of the principal amount, interest, and costs from the defendants' assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs.12,69,750/- plus interest and costs to be recovered from defendants' movable and immovable assets.

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hyderabad) versus Sh… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

T.A. No.1115 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 1115 of 2023

¶5

State Bank of India (e-State Bank of Hyderabad) RACPC, Ground Floor, A Block 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sh.Ankur Pathak s/o Sh.Ashok Pathak Proprietor of M/s Shikha Enterprises At : 198/12, 1st Floor, Ganpathi Place Above Sudarshan Traders Ramesh Market, Garhi, East of Kailash, New Delhi

¶8

Sh.Ashok Pathak s/o Om Prakash Pathak Manager of M/s Shikha Enterprises At : 198/12, 1s Floor, Ganpathi Place Above Sudarshan Traders Ramesh Market, Garhi, East of Kailash, New Delhi

¶9

Both at: J-8, Block H, Adhyapak Nagar Nangloi, Delhi. Also at: F-66-A, Upper Ground Floor Gali No.3, Janta Garden Pandav Nagar, Delhi-110091 Also at: 58, Bhatta Gautambudh Nagar Noida, UP Also at: E-67, 3rd Floor, Pandav Nagar Delhi-110092 Defendants

¶10

T.A. No.1115 of 2023

¶11

Present: Shri Jeewan Prakash Gupta, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶12

Date of Irotitution: 29.03.2019

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 24.12.2024

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 29.03.2019 through Sh.A.K.Srivastava, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.12,69,750/- (Rupees Twelve Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty only) as on 26.03.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.85% per annum with monthly rest plus 2% penal interest from the date of filing of this application till its realization and costs. Further, the name of Mr. Anil Kumar Garg was substituted as authorized representative in place of Sh.A.K.Srivastava, erstwhile authorised representative for the applicant bank

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendants vide their vehicle loan application dated 19.11.2013 with Performa invoice dated 11.11.2013, the applicant bank sanctioned Vehicle Loan of Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.11.2013 @10.60% interest & penal interest @2% in the event of default or delay in repayment schedule to be repayable 84 monthly instalments of Rs.17,051/- in order to purchase Mahindra XUV 500 W-6 car from M/s Shiva Auto Car (I) P.Ltd.

¶17

That in order to avail the car loan fazility, the defendants submitted loan application dated 19.11.2013 with Performa

¶18

T.A. No.1115 of 2023

¶19

invoice dated 11.11.2013 and executed Sanction / Arrangement Letter, Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement, Letter of Authority, Declaration and Letter of Standing Instructions / mandate all dated 20.11.2013 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶20

That in order to secure the loan facility, the defendants hypothecated the Mahindra XUV 500 W-6 car having DL-1TEMP AM-7007, Chasis No.MA1YT2HJUD6H12141, Engine No. H3D4H17039 with the applicant bank.

¶21

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite request dated 24.06.2015, failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly instalments in time to the applicant bank. The applicant bank classified the account as Non Performing Asset on 30.042016 and issued legal demand notice dated 21.02.2019 to adjust the dues of the applicant bank along with interest but defendants failed to comply with the notice. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶22

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants chose to absent from the proceedings and none appeared on behalf of defendants, hence proceed ex-parte. As per order dated 22.11.2023, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte due to non filing of written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets before this Tribunal.

¶23

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Anil Kumar Garg, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the

¶24

T.A. No.1115 of 2023

¶25

documents as Gazette Notification Ex.AW1/1(colly), Loan Application Ex.AW1/2, Proforma Invoice Ex.AW1/3, Sanction / Arrangement Letter Ex.AW1/4, Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement Ex.AW1/5, Letter of Authority Ex.AW1/6, Declaration Ex.AW1/7, Letter of Standing Instructions Ex.AW1/8, Letter Ex.AW1/9, Email Ex.AW1/10, Retail Invoice Ex.AW1/11, Insurance Cover Note Ex.AW1/12, Temporary Registration Certificate Ex.AW1/13, Letters Ex.AW1/14 to Ex.AW1/18, Legal Demand Notice Ex.AW1/19, Speed Post Ex.AW1/20(colly), AD Card Ex.AW1/21(colly), Certified Statement of Accounts Ex.AW1/22(colly) to Ex.AW1/24, Assets & Liabilities Statement along with Worthiness as per Schedule A Ex.AW1/25(colly) to Ex.AW1/28.

¶26

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶27

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts

¶28

In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶29

ORDER

¶30

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.12,69,750/- (Rupees Twelve Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty only) along with pendentelite and future interest p11.85% per annum with monthly rest and costs from

¶31

T.A. No.1115 of 2023

¶32

filing of this 0.A., failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of Mahindra XUV 500 W-6 car having DL1TEMP AM-7007, Chasis No.MA1YT2HJUD6H12141, Engine No. HJD4H17039. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants as per Schedule A and B of this original application.

¶33

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶34

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 24.02.2025.

¶35

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Re.:overy Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶36

501-2,2„Aov", (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶37

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 24.12.2024

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hyderabad) v. Sh. Ankur Patahak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hyderabad) v. Sh. Ankur Patahak

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

Ruchi Shukla versus Bank of India

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Rajesh Gupta

Canara Bank versus M/S Anjani Tiles and Sanitary Ware

State Bank of India versus Sh. Ashish Kumar

Uco Bank versus Ms.Vandana Verma

Bank of India versus Sh. Vinod Goswami