Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Rajput Traders

DRT29 Jan 2025OA/1028/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed the applicants request under Section 19 of the DRBA to recover outstanding dues along with interest. The court issued a recovery certificate, declared the mortgaged property and assets of the respondents liable for recovery, and granted a perpetual injunction against them.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; interest granted; mortgaged property and assets held liable; injunction against transferring assets granted.

Union Bank of India versus Rajput Traders — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'ble Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶4

Original Applicotion No. - 1028123

¶5

Union Bank of lndia, Asset Recovery Branch, Russel Chowk, Napier Town, Jabatpur (M.P.)

¶6

AppIicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

01 ) M/s Rajput Traders, Through its Proprietor-Nirpat 5ingh, 561 , Charagawan (Ahmedpur), Near Bus Stand, Sahapura, Jabatpur (M.P.)

¶9

Nirpat Singh, S/o Jagdeesh 5ingh, Vittage-Bhadpura, Post-Chargawan, District-Jabatpur^(M. P. )

¶10

Reenu Tomar, 5/o Narendra Singh Tomar C-19, Dhanwantri Nagar, Jabatpur Defendants CounseI for the Applicant : Shri Shreyas Dubey, Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

(oateal7fl' .larurartr, zozs )

¶13

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Application u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 15109123 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 90,61 ,942.99 (rupees Ninety Lakh, Sixty One Thousand, Nine Hundred Fourty Two and Paisa Ninety Nine onty) atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its Proprietor Defendant No.-2, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 30 Lakh on 13/10/17, Term Loan of Rs. 20.18 Lakh on 20/12/17, Term Loan DPGL timit of Rs. 14.70 Lakh on 13/02/18, adhoc credit timit (FITL) of Rs. 2,00,059/- and Term Loan (FITL) of Rs. 1,26,350/- on 30/03/^'19. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facitities the Defendant No.-1 & 2 as borrower and Defendant No.-3 as guarantor in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have

¶15

¶16

oA 1028123

¶17

also created equitabte mortgage over the immovable^{property,i.e.,Land} having Khasra No.-573, N.B.-3'19, PHN-58, situated at Mauja-Bhadpura, Revenue Ci rcle-Charganwa, Shahpura, admeasuring 1.49 hectares; belonging to Defendant No.-3. The Defendant No.-1 & 2 avaited the credit facilities but did not adhere to financial disciptine. The accounts became NPA and the Defendants failed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recall Notice on 27 105/21 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank^has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-46 which were^proved by Shri Mohan Kumar, Chief Manager

¶18

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 04/07/24. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointly and severatty liabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Applicant-Bank in its apptication has ctaimed interest @8.90% p.a. with monthly rests in cash credit account, interest @9.75y0 p.a. with monthly rests in term [oan-'l account, interest @8.65% p.a. with monthly rests in term loan-2, FITL account No.-325706350000006 and FITL account No.- 325706350000007. However, I feel it fair and reasonable to grant interest @8.90% p.a. simpte in cash credit account, interest @9.75% p.a. simpte in term toan-1 account, interest @8,65yo p.a. simple in term [oan-2 account, interest @ 8.65% p.a. simple in FITL account No.-325706350000006 and interest @ 8.65% p.a. simpte in FITL account No.- 325706350000007 pendentetite and future tit[ realization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sold for recovery of amount due atong with the^personat properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶19

The Original Application is attowed and it is ordered as under-

¶20

i) The Defendants do^{pay jointty} and severatty^{Rs' 90,61,942.99} (Rupees Ninety Lakh, Sixty One Thousand, Nine Hundred^{Fourty Two and} Paisa Ninety Nine onty) together with^{pendentetiteand futureinterest} @8.90%^{p.a. simpte in cash credit account,[email protected]%p.a. simptein} term loan-l account, interest @8.65%^{p'a. simple in term [oan'2account,} interest @ 8.65%^{p.a. simpte in FITLaccount No.-325706350000005and} .interest @ 8.65% p.a. simpte in FITL account No.- 325706350000007 from the date of fiLing of the^OA, i.e.,^{15/09/23, with costs ti[[ its reatization'}

¶21

¶22

oA 1028123

¶23

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the^{mortgagedas wetl as} personal properties and assets of the Defendants for^{reatization of its dues.} The Defendants are hereby restrained by^{means of injunctionfrom} depteting, transferring, encumbering, atienating^{or in any way deating with} their properties/assets without first^{paying the ctaim of the AppticantBank.}

¶24

iii) A Recovery Certificate be^{issued ui s '19(27) of Recovery of} Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The^{appticant bank may fite a memo of cost} within 7 days for^{preparingRecoveryCertificate.}

¶25

Judgment^pronounced in the^{open court on this 29th Day of January,2025.}

¶26

,/ nb ,\t ( Patel,) Presidine Officer

Union Bank of India v. Rajput Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Rajput Traders

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

Canara Bank versus M/S Maa Hinglaaj Autodeal and Spare

State Bank of India versus M/S Ashok Agency

Icici Bank Limited versus Sarwamangala Sales

Ankush Gadwal versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Shree Mahalakshmi Namkin through its Proprietor Rajkumar Sharma versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Idbi Bank versus Nakoda Traders