Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Rajesh Babu

DRT11 Feb 2025OA/313/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this debt recovery matter, a Housing Loan Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's claim for recovery of dues from borrowers who failed to repay a home loan due to the property not being completed. The court awarded principal, interest, and authorized the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability to pay Rs. 21,18,301.76 plus 8.60% simple interest; injunction against transferring assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Central Bank of India versus Rajesh Babu — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No. - 313/24

¶5

Central Bank of lndia, Transport Nagar, G.E. Road, Bhiati-3 (C.G.) 490021

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

01 ) Shri Rajesh Babu, S/o Shri Chiti Babu

¶9

Smt. M. Pushpa, W/o Shri Rajesh Babu

¶10

(1 & 2 at 2171 112, Ward No.-12, Jawahar Nagar, Bhilai, District-Durg, C.G. 490023),

¶11

M/s Kuber Mega Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kuber Green, Near Garv lnstitute of Management And Technology, Purari, Distt.-Durg (C.G.)

¶12

Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Sanjeev Dubey, Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Dated : 11th February, 2025)

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited the^present Originat Application u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 76/02/24 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs.21,18,301.76 (Rupees Twenty One Lakh, Eighteen Thousand, Three Hundred One and Paisa Seventy Six on[y) a[ong with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 & 2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs. 17 Lakh on 13/08/16 for purchase of Dup[ex situated at Khasra No.-60711 and 60712, ViLtage-Purai, Near Garv lnstitute of Techno[ogy and Pauwara Railway Station, Tehsit &. District-Durg (C.G.) from Defendant No.-3 who is a builder and developer. ln consideration of the same the Defendant No.-1 and² executed requisite loan documents on 16108/16. A Tripartite Agreement dated 28/07/16 was executed between the Appticant and the Defendant No.-1 and Defendant No.-3 whereby Defendant No.-3 shatI refund the amount in case of cancetlation of the atlotment of house/ftat for any reason

¶18

¶19

oA3t3t24

¶20

whatsoever. The property which was a[totted to the Defendant No.-1 and 2 has yet not compteted and therefore, the title deed was not deposited by the Defendants to the Appticant-Bank. The Defendants avaited the credit facitity but failed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recatl Notice on 05101 /24 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-11 which were proved by Shri Abhishek R. Nandeshwar, Branch Manager.

¶21

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited wrjtten statement. They were proceeded ex-parte v.ide order dated 05/07 124. There is therefore, no reason to disbelieve the contentions of the Bank. Consrdering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointty and severatty liabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has claimed contractual rate of interest @8.60% p.a. ptus penalty/ additionat interest. However, I feel it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @8.60% p.a. simple pendentetite and future ti[[ realization of the dues. The personal properties and assets of the Defendants are liable to be sold for recovery of amount due.

¶22

The Original Apptication is altowed and it is ordered as underi) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatty Rs. 21,18,301 .76 (Rupees Twenty One Lakh, Eighteen Thousand, Three Hundred One and Paisa Seventy Six onty) together with pendentelite and future interest @8.60% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,26/02/24, with costs tilt its realization.

¶23

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the personat properties and assets of the Defendants for realization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way dealing with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Applicant Bank.

¶24

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate,

¶25

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 11th Day of Februa 025.

¶26

q (Ram Niwas Patet) Presidinq Officer

¶27

)

Central Bank of India v. Rajesh Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Rajesh Babu

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

Bank of India versus Dhannu Pariwale

Bank of Baroda versus Prakash Trading Co.

Shri Sharad Jetha versus Icici Bank Limited

Union Bank of India versus Praveen Singh Baghel

Union Bank of India versus Tejpal Singh Rana

Icici Bank Limited versus Vishnu Prasad