Allowed

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hydrabad) v. M/S Aakriti Fashion

DRT23 Dec 2024TA/1233/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of RDB Act for recovery of loan dues. Proceedings were conducted ex-parte against absent defendants. The tribunal directed payment of the principal amount with interest and authorized recovery from hypothecated stocks and other assets.

What did the court decide?

Direct order to pay Rs.10,64,000/- with interest to applicant. Direction to issue recovery certificate and sanction sale of hypothecated stocks or other assets.

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hydrabad)… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

T.A. No.1233 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. 1233 of 2023

¶5

State Bank of India

¶6

(e-State Bank of Hyderabad) SMEC (Central) B Block, Ground Floor, 11 Parliament Street New Delhi-110001

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Aakriti Fashion

¶10

Through its sole proprietor Sh.Pawan Kumar Sharma s/o Madan Lal Shop No.1455/15, 1st Floor Shree Ram Market, Gali Chipiyan

¶11

Maliwara, Nai Sarak, Delhi-110006

¶12

Sh.Pawan Kumar Sharma s/o Madan Lal Proprietor of Aakriti Fashion H.No.A-97, 3rd Floor, Flat No.10 North Vinod Nagar, Gali No.1 Delhi-110092 Defendants

¶13

Present: Shri Rajeev Sagar, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Institution: 18.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 23.12.2024

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 18.03.2019 through Mr.Balram Mehra, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act., 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.10,64,000/- (Rupees Ten

¶17

Sd—

¶18

T.A. No.1233 of 2023

¶19

Lacs Sixty Four Thousand only) as on 29.10.2018 along with pendentelite and future interest @11.60% per annum with monthly rest from 29.10.2018 till its realization and costs.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor being defendant no.2, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit limit of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) on 31.03.2017 @11.60% interest against hypothecation of stock as prime security for business requirement. The defendants agreed to pay penal interest @2% per annum in case of default in submission of renewal date and for irregular drawings.

¶21

That in order to avail the said loan facility, the defendant no.1 through defendant no.2 submitted loan application along with relevant documents and execute the Letter of Arrangement dated 31.03.2017, Link Letter dated 15.03.2016, Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement along with Guarantee Agreement by defendant no.2 in favour of the applicant bank on 31.03.2017

¶22

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 of loan agreement despite several requests for regularization of the account and diverted the funds. The applicant bank classified the account as Non Performing Asset on 02.08.2018 and served loan recall notice dated 08.03.2019 for regularization of the account and to adjustment of the but defendant failed to comply with the notice. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶23

T.A. No.1233 of 2023

¶24

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. As per order dated 30.07.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte due to non filing of written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets before this Tribunal.

¶25

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of filing the original documents as Gazette Notification Annexure P-1 & P-2, Original Loan Application Annexure P-3, Letter of Arrangement Annexure P-4, Loan-cumHypothecation Agreement Annexure P-5, Link Letter Annexure P-6, Guarantee Agreement Annexure P-7, Certified Statement of Account Annexure P-8, Loan Recall Notice Annexure P-9, Postal Receipts Annexure P10.

¶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 and 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.

sct-

T.A. No.1233 of 2023

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.10,64,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs Sixty Four Thousand only) as on 29.10.2018 along with pendentelite and future interest @11.60% per annum with monthly rest from 29.10.2018 till its realization and costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated stocks etc. In case of shortfall / default the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶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 21.02.2025.

¶35

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

¶36

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶37

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 23.12.2024

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hydrabad) v. M/S Aakriti Fashion

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hydrabad) v. M/S Aakriti Fashion

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

Union Bank of India (E-Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Pracheer Bhardwaj

Axis Bank versus Sh. Kapil Gupta

Canara Bank versus Smt.Sidamma

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shri Giriraj Traders

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Bansiwala Roadlines

State Bank of India (e-State Bank of Patiala) versus Smt. Alka Jain