Allowed

Indian Bank v. Ms Madhu Traders

DRT5 Feb 2025OA/319/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application against property developers and guarantors for recovery of dues. The court ordered joint and several liability for repayment and authorized the sale of mortgaged and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹69,77,226 with interest; sale of mortgaged and personal properties; injunction against asset transfer; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Indian Bank versus Ms Madhu Traders — Banking and Recovery | 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 Applicotion No.^- 319123

¶5

lndian Bank, (erstwhite Attahabad Bank) Kotwati Road, Bhopal (M.P.)462001

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Madhu Traders, 01 ) Through its PropreitorSmt. Nidhi Jain, GYA-06, Krishi Upaj Mandi, Karond, Bhopat (M.P.)

¶9

Smt. Nidhi Jain, W/o Shri Satish Jain, R/o House No.-280, Jain Nagar, Latghati, Bhopat (M.P.); Atso at: Shop No.-'l , Ground Floor, Ptot No.-103, Akash Apartment, Vijay Nagar, Latghati, Tehsit-Huzur, Distt.-Bhopat^(M.P. )

¶10

Shri Shaitendra Jain, S/o Late Sheeta[ Chandra Jain, R/o House No.-280, Jain Nagar, Latghati, Bhopat (M.P.)

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Rajendra Singh^{Parmar, Advocate} Defendants : Ex-parte

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

(Dated: 5th February, 2025)

¶15

The Appticant-Bank has fited the^present Original Application u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 18103/23 against^the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 69,77,226.00^(Rupees Sixty^{Nine Lakh,} Seventy Seven Thousand, Two Hundred and Twenty Six onty) along with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its Proprietor Defendant No.-2, the erstwhi[e Attahabad Bank subsequentty amatgamated with lndian Bank^(hereinafter referred to as the Appticant Bank) vide Gazette Notification dated 01 104/20, has sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 27 Lakh 1503/13 which was enhanced

¶17

¶18

oA3t9t23

¶19

to Rs. 42 Lakh on 08/05/14. ln consideration of the sanction of CC limit the Defendant No.-1 & 2 as borrower and Defendant No.-3 as guarantor in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have atso created equitable mortgage over the immovable property, i.e., atl part and parcel of Shop No,-1 on Ground Ftoor, Ptot No.-l03, Akash Apartment, Vijay Nagar, Lalghati, Tehsit-Huzur, District-Bhopat, area 280 sq.ft.; betonging to Defendant No.-3. The Defendants availed the credit facitity and atso executed Acknowledgment of Debt on 77/03/20 but did not make the requisite payment of the monthty instatlments. The account was classified as NPA and the Defendants faited to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Recatl Notice lastty on 29/07/19 and initiation of action under the Securitisation Act by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A.23 which were proved by Shri Vikash Shankar, Branch Manager.

¶20

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 08/05/24. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointty and severally liabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its application has ctaimed interest @12% p.a. with monthly rests. However, I feel it fair and reasonable to grant interest @17% p.a. simpte pendentetite and future titt reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶21

The Originat Apptication is attowed and it is ordered as under-

¶22

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severalty Rs. 69,77,226.00 (Rupees Sixty Nine Lakh, Seventy Seven Thousand, Two Hundred and Twenty Six onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @12% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the 0A, i.e., 18103/23, with costs ti[[ its reatization.

¶23

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to sell the mortgaged as we[[ as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way dealing with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶24

¶25

oA3t9t23

¶26

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

¶27

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 05th Day of February, 2025.

¶28

t' 2
( was PateI )
Presidine Officer

Indian Bank v. Ms Madhu Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Ms Madhu 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

Idbi Bank versus Neelam Singh

State Bank of India versus Priti Narendra Solanki

Ms Taj Heavy Engineering Company versus Bank of India

Punjab National Bank versus Ranjeet

Bank of Baroda versus Ultra Polymer

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Earth Stone Construction Associates