Allowed

Uco Bank v. Netai Mondal and Ors.

DRT29 Jan 2025OA/144/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Debts Recovery Tribunal originating application filed by UCO Bank for recovery of a loan amount from defendants who did not appear. The claim was established via evidence of loan documents. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable and granted a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Debt determined at Rs. 42,42,049 with future interest at 11.45% p.a.; recovery certificate issued; defendants debarred from alienating properties.

Uco Bank versus Netai Mondal and Ors. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III KOLKATA PRESENT: -SRI KAMAL DE.

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICCR.

¶4

O,A. No. 144 of 2022.

¶5

DATE OF DELIVERY OF ORDER: 29lOLl2O2s

¶6

UCO Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banklng Companies(Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1985 having lts reglstered office at 10, B.T.M. Sarani, Kolkata-700001 and also carrying on business from numerous branches including one Bansdroni Branch having its office at 235/3, N.S.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700047 duly represented by Ohananjay Kumar and address for all services of notice as stated above within the^jurisdiction of this Ld. Tribunal.

¶7

... Applicant Bank.

¶8

-Versus-

¶9

Netai Mondal, son of Lakshikanta Mondal

¶10

M/s, Mahamaya Enterprise, a proprietorship firm.

¶11

Shanta Mondal, wife of Netai Mondal

¶12

]

¶13

Addresses of defendant no. 1-3 ls at Vidyasagar pally, Lane No. 4, Brick Field Road, Subuddhipur, P.O.-Baruipur, Oist.- South 24^parganas, Kotkata- 700144 and service of all notlces is same as above.

¶14

Defendants.

¶15

Counsel for the Applicant Bank: -

¶16

Mr.Sachetan Ghosh, Advocate,

Set ex-parte on

20/or/202s

JUDGEMENT

The Applicant Bank f ed the present O.A. being No. O.A./L44/2022 on L6/03/2O22 for recovery of a total sum of pf, 42,a2,O49/- (Rupees Forty Two Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Forty Nrne )only from the Defendants towards term loan together wlth interest. cost and other usual reliefs.

¶21

The Defendants are served with summons. The defendants did not appear, as there was no representation from the defendants, the case was fixed for ex_parte hearing on 20/01/2025, and heard ex-parte accordingly.

¶22

The Applicant Bank examined 07 documents through Srl Dhahanjay Kumar, Branch Manager, UCO Bank and marked as Exhiblt Annexure-A to Exhlbit Annexu;e_c.

¶23

4, Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Appllcant Bank.

¶24

The point that arises for conslderauon is :

¶25

whether the Appricant Bank is entifled to the crairn made in the oA against the Defendants and OA schedule properties as prayed for?

¶26

As stated supra, the Defendant remained absent and did not turn up to controvert the version of the o.A, of Appricant Bank. The Evidence Affidavit coupred wjth the recitals in the documents vjz., Exhtbits Annexure-A to Exhibit Annexure-G marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank, established the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants and OA schedule properties. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank the claims made in the OA with future interest and costs,

¶27

7, In the resurt, the present originar Apprication is aflowed ex-parte with costs, as under:_

¶28

ORDER

¶29

¶30

(1) O.A. No. 144 of 2022 med by the Applicant Bank is allowed and debt ls determlned with cost

¶31

against the defendants. Jl is hereby ordered that applicant bank is entided to recover from

¶32

the defendants the total to the tune ot Fs 42'a2'o4gl- (Rupees Forty Two Lacs

¶33

Etghty Two ,nor""no ,on"to'nt Nine ) only with pendentelite and future interest @ 11.4s%

¶34

perannum interest due frry ru, and n,", ;;,;;:;:;:i"T""t:::::"t "'he orisrnar Apprication i.e. 16.03.2022 ti,

¶35

(2) Amount, if any, paid by th€ tn" loan accounts or ar

¶36

the Applicant Bank after ,,,' "1ouno 'n ir anv' recovered bv tn" o o tn" ""'"i" ,";';,;l*'

¶37

the exact amount o,, 0""";11 :t ruture interest shar b" _;,t"",::"J",::".jr;;;;# ^::ffi';ilt;::il[:,:j

¶38

(3) Defendants are debarred fr €lienating or dealing with anv of the properties

¶39

berongrng to them tir, ,n" ""tl--1|j'-ot''n' )resaid decretal debt is recovered from the defendants.

¶40

(4) Defendants are given a time days from the date of the ludgemenvFinal order for

¶41

repaying of the "oor" n1"no.ll-tnl* dues' so intimated to them ln c

¶42

pav the dues,r,,n,n rnu uoorll"l the defendants fail to t"'t'on"o t''"' tn" "ooit""t i-n'ase is entitled to recover its

¶43

dues by sare of secured "1i if anv' Applicant o# ;";;T personar properties or tne jl to proceed against against the defendano ,"".:1:'1""o rt"in '"""0" ""'"':ucntitled atso proceed ralry to recover the dr", in "."oro"n#le)rnnd

¶44

(5) Let the Certificate of Recov drawn up by Ld. Registrar forthwith in terms of

¶45

Judgement for rssuance o, ,nlt- f" same against defendants ln favou

¶46

under section rs 1zz1 or *re ie oi same ror rssuance or ,n" ."n,r,tl"rlJ", ""r;r ";;;;;;J::'J^"i# #;J:rtil:

¶47

(6) Ld. Recovery Off,cer shal rea the amount as per the Recovery certificate from the

¶48

defendants in accord""." ,rnn ,lii

¶49

(7) Ld. Registrar of this Tribunal is orderljudgement for recovery '^directed to deliver recovery certificate in term of the final f the sum against the defendant in favour of the Applicant

¶50

Bank under Sectlon 19 (22) of the Recovery of Oebts due to the Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 now known as Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993.

¶51

(8) The parties are dlrected to appear before the Recovery Officet on 07/O3/2O25 for further action in accordance with law in the event the entlre amount is not paid by the said date.

¶52

Accordlngly, the Original Appllcation belng O.A. No. 144 of 2022 is allowed and stands disposed of,

¶53

¶54

Copy of the JudgemenvFlnal Order be uploaded in the TribunalS website.

¶55

File is consigned to the Record Room.

¶56

(Oictated to steno, transcribed by hh, corrected, slgned and pronounced by me ln the open court on the 296 day of lanuary, 2025).

¶57

( KAMAL OE ) PRESIDING OFFICER.

¶58

¶59

Debts Recovery Tribunal-3, Kolkata Order Sheet (Continuation)

¶60

CaseNo.O,A.l	l44/2022 UCOBank Vs. Netai}londal&Ors.
DateofOrder	Orderwithsignature
OrderNo.10 ot.29t01t2025	Order pronounced (vide separate sheets). Intheresult, O.A, No, 144of2022isallowed
	costs. IssueRecoveryCertificate accordingly.
	(KamalDe) PresidingOfficer DRT-3,Kolkata
SB

¶61

Debts Recovery Tribunal-3, Kolkata Order Sheet (Continuation)

¶62

CaseNo.O.A./	144/2022	UCOBank vs. Netai Mondal& Ors.
		Orderwithsignature
OrderNo.09 ot.20t01t 2025	Preacnt:,
	ForApplicant ForDefendants	: Ld. Counsel Mr.SachetanGhosh : None
	TheRegis terftsoforderp turned updespite upontheDefenda ex-parte.Them availabletothe evidenceistobe parte.Heardthe order, Applicant mayfile To29/0!/2025for	tryhasissuednoticetotheDefendantsin assedby thisTribunal. Defendants havenot thefactthat thenotices have beenserved nts.Applicantprayedforhearingof thecase atterispendtngsince2022.Henceright DefendantsforfitjngofW.S,andcounter closed.Itisclosed,TheOAproceedsex_ LdCounselfortheApplicant.Reservedfor writtennotes of arqument. ordet,
		(KamalDe) PresidingOfficer DRT-3, Kolkata

Uco Bank v. Netai Mondal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Netai Mondal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus Mrs Swapna Das and Anr.

Canara Bank versus M/S Variety Stores

Svt Enterprise and Ors. versus U Gro Capital Ltd. and Anr.

Subinoy Pal and Anr. versus Punjab National Bank

Canara Bank versus Mrs Chhaya Dey and Anr.

State Bank of India versus Bata Krushna Bhanja