Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Sh. Mukesh Goswami

DRT6 Jun 2024TA/441/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of loan dues against respondents who defaulted on a housing loan, despite their absence. The bank was directed to recover the principal, interest, and costs from the defendants' properties.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay Rs.50,76,693/- plus interest and costs within 30 days; recovery from mortgaged property if not paid.

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Mukesh Goswami — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

T.A. No.441 of 2022

¶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.441 of 2022

¶5

Punjab National Bank K.M.Trade Tower, M3 Modipon Vihar Sector 14, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad, UP-201010 Applicant
Versus
1. Sh.Mukesh Goswami s/o Kamal Kishore Giri R/o C-157, Gali No.3, Pusta Road, Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094
2. Sh.Amrish Kumar s/o Mangat Singh P-104, Gali No.5 Shankar Ncgar Extension Opposite Primary School, Delhi
3. Sh.Raj Kumar Jain s/o Jiya Lal Jain C-10, 3^rdFloor, Ramprastha Ghaziabad, UP
4. Sh Vijayant Jain s/o Vijay Kumar Jain C-10, 3rdFloor, Ramprastha Ghaziabad, UP Defendants

¶6

Present: Shri Saurabh Kaushik, counsel for the applicant bank

¶7

Date of Institution: 11.08.2020

¶8

Date of Pronouncement: 06.06.2024

¶9

FINAL ORDER

¶10

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 23.12.2021 before DRT-III Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I, Delhi through Mrs. Vimmi Gupta, authorized

¶11

gce

¶12

T.A. No.441 of 2022

¶13

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.50,76,693/- (Rupees Fifty Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Three only) as on 10.06.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest @8.90% per annum with monthly rest plus penal interest @2% per annum the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant no.1 & 2, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan facility for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lacs only) on 31.05.2013 @10.25% interest and penal interest @2% per annum on overdue amount repayable in 300 monthly installment of Rs.36,760/- in order to purchase residential plot No.4, Khasra No.26, Shatabdipuram, Village Dasna, Ghaziabad measuring 76.18 sq.metres.

¶15

That in order to avail the said housing loan facility, the defendants submitted housing loan application and executed Agreement for housing loan, Agreements of guarantees and Consent clause dated 31.05.2013.

¶16

That in order to secure the loan facility, the defendant no.3 and 4 stood as guarantor and executed agreement of guarantee. Further, the defendant no.1 & 2 executed Letter of Intent dated 04.07.2013 duly acknowledged by applicant bank on 05.07.2013 and deposited Sale Deed executed by Manju Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. registered as document no.5516, Bahi No.1, Jild No.11153 on pages 359 to 428 of property being Residential plot No.4, Khasra No.26, Shatabdipuram, Village Dasna, Ghaziabad in favour of applicant bank for creation of mortgage. The defendants acknowledged their liability and

¶17

Sce

¶18

T.A. No.441 of 2022

¶19

executed balance and security confirmation on 29.02.2016 & 25.02.2019 with the applicant bank.

¶20

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants defaulted in payment of monthly installments and neglected to pay the amount towards interest and installments as per terms and conditions despite several requests by the applicant bank. Ultimately, applicant bank classified the account was declared as NPA on 01.05.2018 as per RBI guidelines. The applicant bank issued recatl notice dated 10.06.2020 to defendants but there is no response, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶21

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 19.05.2018 was issued to the defendants.

¶22

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 10.06.2022, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶23

In order to prove its case, applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Mrs. Vimmi Gupta, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of attorney Ex.AW-1/1, Loan application with documents Ex.AW-1/2, Sanction letter Ex.AW-1/3, Agreement for housing loan Ex.AW-1/4, Agreements of guarantees Ex.AW-1/5 & 6, Consent Clause Ex.AW-1/7 & 8(colly), Letter of Intent Ex.AW-1/9, Letter of gcl

¶24

T.A. No.441 of 2022

¶25

acknowledgement Ex.AW-1/10, Sale deed Ex.AW-1/11, Balance & confirmation letter Ex.AW-1/12(colly), Notice under Section 13(2) Ex.AW-1/13, Recall notice Ex.AW-1/14, Statement of Account Ex.AW-1/15, Certified Statement u/s 65B(2) of Indian Evidence Act & u/s 2A(b) of Bankers Books Evidence Act with NPA certificate Ex.AW-1/16(colly).

¶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 the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶28

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶29

ORDER

¶30

(I) I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.50,76,693/- (Rupees Fifty Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Three only) as on 10.06.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest ©10.90% per annum with monthly rest and costs from the date of filing of this O.A. till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of residential plot No.4, Khasra No.26, Shatabdipuram, Village Dasna, Ghaziabad measuring 76.18 sq.metres. In case of shortfall,

¶31

T.A. No.441 of 2022

¶32

the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties 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 Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 05.08.2024.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 06.06.2024

Punjab National Bank v. Sh. Mukesh Goswami

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Sh. Mukesh Goswami

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash Kanubhai Domadiya versus Axis Bank

State Bank of India versus Vishwas Fuel Station

Union Bank of India versus Niteshkumar

Icici Bank Limited versus Tkb Educational Initiatives Pvt. Ltd.

Central Bank of India versus Jeetin Gupta

Karur Vysya Bank versus Jss Tradexprivate Limited