Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Jeetin Gupta

DRT6 Jun 2024TA/448/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed an application filed by Central Bank of India for recovery of dues of Rs.46.14 lakhs from defendants engaged in footwear manufacturing who defaulted on loans. The application was adjudicated ex-parte as respondents did not appear, and a recovery certificate was directed.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.46,14,498/- with interest within 30 days; recovery certificate issued for recovery from sale of hypothecated and mortgaged assets.

Central Bank of India versus Jeetin Gupta — Specific Performance | DRT (2024)

¶1

T.A. No.448 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. 448 of 2023

¶5

Central Bank of India 468-469, a/2, Rampura Road Keshavpuram, Delhi Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Jeetin Gupta House No.57-58, Pocket 7 Upper Ground Floor Sector-2, Rohini, Delhi-110085

¶8

Jeetin Enterprises House No.57-58, Pocket 7 Upper Ground Floor Sector-2, Rohini, Delhi-110085

¶9

Mrs. Renu Gupta House No.57-58, Pocket 7 Upper Ground Floor

¶10

Sector-2, Rohini, Delhi-110085 Defendants

¶11

Present: Shri Rajesh Sharma, counsel for the applicant bank

¶12

Date of Institution: 12.03.2021

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 06.06.2024

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 12.03.2021 filed before DRT-III, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Sh.Dinesh Chand Joshi, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against

¶16

T.A. No.448 of 2023

¶17

the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.46,14,498/(Rupees Forty Six Lacs Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Eight only) as on 10.02.2021, out of which Rs.32,10,108/- in cash credit account @11.05% together with pendentelite and future interest and Rs.14,04,390/- in term loan account @11.30% together with pendentelite and future interest from date of filing of this application till its realization along with costs.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 being proprietor of defendant no.2 engaged in business of manufacturing of footwear was sanctioned Cash Credit cum ODBD limit of Rs.25.00 lacs @9.40% interest & Term Loan facility of Rs.15.00 lacs @9.90% interest on 23.06.2017 against hypothecation of stocks, plant & machinery and residential property as collateral security.

¶19

That in order to avail the said loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted application form on 16.04.2017 and executed Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Waiver, Letter of Interest, Letter of Continuity, Agreement of Hypothecation of Secure Demand Cash Credit against goods, Letter of Hypothecation, Articles of Agreement, Declaration & Undertaking, Supplementary Agreement, Letter of Undertaking, Affidavit and Proprietorship Letter all dated 27.06.2017. That the defendant no.3 stood as guarantor for the credit facilities availed by defendant no.1.

¶20

In order to secure the loan facilities, defendant no.1 hypothecated the stocks, goods, machineries etc. in favour of applicant bank. Further, defendant no.3 created equitable mortgage of immovable property bearing House No.D-614882, Rajendra Park, Gurgaon, Haryana by depositing Sale Deed dated 19.12.2015 with applicant bank on 27.06.2017.

¶21

¶22

T.A. No.448 of 2023

¶23

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and to comply with the terms and conditions despite of several requests for regularization of the account but the defendants failed and neglected to pay the amount towards interest and committed various defaults. The applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.05.2019 as per RBI guidelines. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for. recovery of their dues.

¶24

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 01.12.2023, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶25

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Dinesh Chand Joshi, authorized representative of applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Exhibit A-1, Loan Application Exhibit A-2, Sanction Letter Exhibit A-3, DP Note Exhibit A-4, Letter of Waiver Exhibit A-5, Letter of Interest Exhibit A-6, Letter of Continuity Exhibit A-7, Agreement of Hypothecation Exhibit A-8, Letter of Hypothecation of Book Debts Exhibit A-9, Articles of Agreement Exhibit A-10, Undertaking Exhibit A-11, Supplementary Agreement Exhibit A-12, Letter of Undertaking Exhibit A-13, Affidavit Exhibit A- 14, Letter of Proprietorship Exhibit A-15, Agreement for Guarantee Exhibit A-16, Title Deeds Exhibit A-17, Memorandum Exhibit 1-18, Notice u/s 13(2) Exhibit A-19, Certified Statement of Account Exhibit A-20.

¶26

T.A. No.448 of 2023

¶27

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.

¶28

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.

¶29

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

¶30

ORDER

¶31

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants, jointly or severally, to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.46,14,498/- (Rs Forty Six Lacs Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Eight only) as on 10.02.2021 together with pendentelite and future interest ©11.30% per annum from date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated goods, book debts, machineries and mortgaged House No.D-61-4882, Rajendra Park, Gurgaon, Haryana. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable personal properties of the defendants.

¶32

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

¶33

T.A. No.448 of 2023

¶34

(Ill) Parties are directed to appear before the 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 BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶37

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 06.06.2024

Central Bank of India v. Jeetin Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Jeetin Gupta

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

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.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Jss Tradexprivate Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Mukesh Goswami