Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Messrs Rudraksh Printers and Others

DRT16 May 2025OA/142/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the application of Union Bank of India against erstwhile borrowers for recovery of dues of Rs. 39.80 lakhs, modified interest from 24% to 8% p.a., and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate under the RDBFI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 39,80,159.00 with interest at 8% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Liberty to enforce via sale of assets.

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Rudraksh Printers and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.142/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.01.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 16.05.2025

¶6

Union Bank of India, having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400021 and having its Branch Office at: Union Bank of India(Erstwhile Andra bank), SCF 54, Sector 8, Panchkula-134108, Haryana, through its Attorney Holder: Sh. Satish Kumar Jha, Chief Manager at: Union Bank of India, Stressed Asset Management Branch at SCO 137-138, Sector 8C, Chandigarh-160008.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Rudraksh Printers, proprietorship of Sh. Deepak Kumar S/o Sh. Anil Dutt, situated at SCO 19, Green City, Near Sekhon Banquet Hall, Dhakoli, MC Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali-160101, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Deepak Kumar S/o Sh. Anil Dutt, R/o House no. 66B, First Floor, Shiva Enclave, Village Khanpur, Tehsil Kharar, SAS Nagar, Mohali-140301, Punjab.

¶11

Sh. Paramjeet Singh S/o Sh. Sukhdev Singh, R/o House no. 34A, Noor Villa, Village Khanpur, Tehsil Kharar, SAS Nagar, Mohali-140301, Punjab.

¶12

…….Defendants

¶13

Advocates: Argued by Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.39,80,159.00 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Eighty Thousand One Hundred Fifty Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Satish Kumar Jha, Chief Manager o f the applicant, who is

¶16

2 OA NO.142/2024

¶17

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RUDRAKSH PRINTERS AND OTHERS

¶18

competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 15.03.2003, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for grant of SOD Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs. 3. The applicant sanctioned SOD Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 01.07.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No.2 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. Residential Plot no. 91 measuring 200 Sq. Yards(6-2/3Marle) situated at Village Khuni Majra, Hadbast No.187, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Punjab vide Equitable Mortgage of Sale Deed bearing vasika no.486 dated 23.04.2014 along with its translation, which are Annexures A6 & A6A to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed:- Composite Agreement, D P Note, General Form of Guarantee all dated 01.07.2014, which are Annexures A3 to A5 to this OA; Title Search Report dated 26.05.2014, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Valuation Report dated 31.05.2014, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Equitable Mortgage dated 01.07.2014, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; CERSAI dated 30.07.2014, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Jamabandi along with its translations dated 08.11.2015, which are Annexures A11 to A11A to this OA; Title Search Report dated 07.06.2016, which is Annexure A12 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A13(Colly) to this OA.

¶21

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.39,80,159.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶22

3 OA NO.142/2024

¶23

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RUDRAKSH PRINTERS AND OTHERS

¶24

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 09.05.2025.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Satish Kumar Jha, Chief Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed.

¶26

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶27

It was argued by learned counsel through Video Conferencing that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A13(Colly) to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.39,80,159.00 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Eighty Thousand One Hundred Fifty Nine Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24.00%p.a. with monthly rests from 01.01.2024 till the realization. The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in

¶29

4 OA NO.142/2024

¶30

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RUDRAKSH PRINTERS AND OTHERS

¶31

the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.39,80,159.00 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Eighty Thousand One Hundred Fifty Nine Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 31.05.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 16.05.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Messrs Rudraksh Printers and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Messrs Rudraksh Printers and Others

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

Punjab National Bank versus Messrs Meghraj and Sons and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Kartar Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Anurag Textiles and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Messrs Harbans Lal Dhawan and Co. and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Kharak Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Paramjit Singh and Others