Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ashish Kumar

DRT24 Dec 2024TA/214/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant bank filed an original application for recovery of loan dues of approximately Rs. 20.7 lakhs with interest. The defendant, having failed to appear after notice, was proceeded ex-parte. The court admitted the bank's evidence and allowed the application, directing recovery from the hypothecated vehicle and other assets.

What did the court decide?

Director to pay Rs. 20,69,940.00 with interest and costs; recovery to be effected by sale of the BMW car and other assets of the defendant.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Ashish Kumar — Specific Performance | DRT (2024)

¶1

T.A. No.214 of 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 214 of 2023

¶5

State Bank of India RACPC, Ground Floor, A Block 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 Applicant Versus Sh.Ashish Kumar GF 431, Neeti Khand II Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, UP

¶6

Also at: Sh.Ashish Kumar Effects Labs Pvt.Ltd. E-155, 1st Floor, Sector 63 Defendant Noida, UP-201301

¶7

Present: Mr. Vipin Jai, counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 03.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 24.12.2024

¶8

FINAL ORDER

¶9

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 03.03.2019 through Sh.A.K.Srivastava^{l 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.20,69,940.00 (Rupees Twelve Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty One only) as on 26.02.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.65% per annum with monthly rest from date of

¶10

T.A. No.214 of 2023

¶11

filing of O.A. and costs till the date of realization. Further, the name of Mr. Jagdish Rai, Chief Manager, SBI was substituted as Authorized representative in place of Mr. A.K.Srivastava, erstwhile AR for the applicant bank

¶12

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant, the applicant bank sanctioned Vehicle Loan of Rs.39,75,000/- on 12.06.2013 @10.45% interest & penal interest @2% in the event of default or delay in repayment schedule to be repayable 84 monthly instalments of Rs.66,918/- for purchasing BMW 5 Series 530d Car having Chasis no.WBAEC57070WP50022.

¶13

That in order to avail the said loan facility, the defendant executed Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement, Operations Letter, Vehicle Delivery Letter and Annexure 1 all dated 12.06.2013 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶14

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions and despite several requests and reminders, the defendant failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. The applicant bank classified the account as Non Performing Asset on 12.12.2017 and served notice dated 10.01.2018 to adjust the outstanding amount along with interest but defendant has failed to comply with the notice. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶15

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 10.01.2018 was issued to the

¶16

sd-

¶17

T.A. No.214 of 2023

¶18

defendant calling upon them to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank.

¶19

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and 6. despite proper service, the defendant chose to absent from the proceedings and none appeared on behalf of defendant, hence proceed ex-parte. As per order dated 18.07.2022, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte due to non filing of written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets before this Tribunal.

¶20

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri A.k.Srivastava, Chief Manager/authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Gazette Notification Exhibit A-1, Loan Arrangement Letter Exhibit A-2, Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement Exhibit A-3, Operations Letter Exhibit A-4, Vehicle Delivery Letter Exhibit A-5, Annexure I Exhibit A-6, Letter dated 10.01.2018 Exhibit A-7, Notice u/s 13(2) Exhibit A-8, Statement of Account Exhibit A-9.

¶21

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.

¶22

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

¶23

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

54-

T.A. No.214 of 2023

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days, a sum of Rs.20,69,940.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Forty only) along with pendentelite and future interest @9.65% per annum with monthly rest and costs from filing of this 0.A., failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of BMW 5 Series 530d Car having Chasis no.WBAEC57070WP50022 and in case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendant.

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 24.12.2024

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ashish Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ashish Kumar

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

Uco Bank versus Ms.Vandana Verma

Bank of India versus Sh. Vinod Goswami