Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. Sunil Sharma and Ors.

DRT10 Jun 2025OA/508/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte proceedings, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application for recovery against four respondents absent from court, determining the debt and granting restoration via a Recovery Certificate under RDB Act 1993.

What did the court decide?

OA allowed ex-parte with costs; debt determined; Recovery Certificate to be issued under Section 19(22) RDB Act; 30 days' time granted for payment; defendants debarred from disposing of properties.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Sunil Sharma and Ors. — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III XOLKATA

¶3

PRESENTI^.SRI KAMAL DE

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

O.A. soa of 2024

¶6

DATE OF DELIVERY OF ORDER I 1010612023

¶7

ThG K.rur Vyry. Brnk Llmltcd, a Banklng Company lncorporated under the Companles Act, 1913 and carrylng on banklng business under license granted by Reserve Bank of India under the Banking Regulatlon Act, 1949 and havlng lts Registered Offlce at 20, Erode Road, Vadlvel Nagar, L.N.S., Karur-639002 and carrying on buslness from lts branch offlce at 80/2, Eangur Avenue, Block-C, Ground Floor, Near Town Hall Kolkata, West Bengal, 700055, Bangur Avenue Branch, Kolkata-700055.

¶8

,.. Appllcant Bank,

¶9

-Versus-

¶10

Mr. Sqnll Shrrma, son of Late Hari Krishna Sharma, at 22/!, Si Hariram Goenka Street, Barabazar, Kolkata-700007 and at Premlses No.-137, "Prasanta Vllla", Flat No.-1A, 1't Floor, Bangur Avenue, Block-B, Ward No. 29, Lake Town, Kolkata-700055.

¶11

l.lr. Dcbarh Rr, Sh.rm., son of Late Kallash Kumar Sharma, at 2211, Slr Hariram Goenka Street, Barabazar, Kolkata-700007 and at Premlses No.-137, "Prasanta Villa", Flat No.-1A, 1$ Floor, Bangur Avenue, Block-B, Ward No. 29, Lake Town, Kolkata-700055.

¶12

¶13

3, Mr. Siddh63h RaJ Sharm.. son of Late Kallash Kumar Sharma, at 2UL, Slr Hariram Goenka Street, Barabazar, Kolkata-700007 and at Premlses No,-137, "Prasanta Vllla', Flat No.-14, lstFloor, Bangur Avenue,^glock-B, Ward No. 29, Lake Town, Kolkata-700055.

¶14

rs. Rarkumarl Sharma, wlfe of Late Kallash Kumar Sharma, at 22/1, Stt Hariram Goenka Street, Barabazar, Kolkata-700007 and at Premlses No.-137, "Prasanta Vllla", Flat No.-1A, 13t Floor, Bangur Avenue, Block-B, Ward No. 29, Lake Town, Kolkata-700055.

¶15

... Defendants.

¶16

For the Applicant(s) : Mr. Nooman Ahmed, Ld. Advocate

¶17

Ms. Atika Arlt Ld. Advocate

¶18

For the Defendant(s) : None

¶19

Set ex parte on 14/05/2025

¶20

]UDGEMENT

¶21

1, The appllcant Bank flled the present OA being O.A. No. 508 of 2024 on 2O/Oa/2024 for recovery of a total sum of Rs. 60,59,513.37l- (Rupees Slxty Lakh Sixty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Thirteen and Thlrty Seven paisa only) from the defendants towards Cash Credlt facllity together with interest, cost and other usual reliefs.

¶22

The defendants are served with summons. The defendants did not appear, as there was no representatlon from the defendants, the case was fixed for ex-parte hearing on 14105/2025, and heard ex-parte accordingly.

¶23

The applicant Bank examlned three documents through I'lr. Bappa Sahu, Asslstant l'1anager, marked as Exhibit Annexure-1 to Exhibit Annexure-3.

¶24

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the appltcant Bank.

¶26

¶27

The polnt that arlses for conslderauon ls :

¶28

Whether the appltcant Bank ts enUued to the clalm made ln the OA agatnst the defendants and OA schedule properties as prayed fo.?

¶29

¶30

As stated supra, the defendants remained absent and dld not turn up to controvert the version of the O.A. oF appltcant Bank. The Evtdence Affldavtt coupted vrith the recltals in the documents viz,, Exhlbits Annexure_1 to Annexure_3 marked on behalf of the applicant Bank, establlshed the clalm of the appltcant Bank agatnst the defendants and OA schedule properfles, Hence, I hold that the defendants are jotnfly and severally llable to pay to the appticant Bank the clalms made tn the OA with future lnterest and costs.

¶31

7, In the result, the present Orlglnal Appllca0oo ts allowed ex_parte wlth costs, as under:-

¶32

ORDER

¶33

¶34

(1) O.A. No, 508 of 2024 filed by the applicant Bank is alowed and debt ts determtned with cost against the defendants. It is hereby ordered that applicant Bank is enflfled to recover from the defendants the total amount to the tune of Rs. 60,69,513.37l_ (Rupees sixty Lakh sixty Nine Thousand Five Hundred rhrrteen and rhrrty seven palsa only) wlth pendent llte and future lnterest @ g,2O% per annum interest with slmple on the amount due from the date of fiting of the Ortginal App[cation i.e 20,08.2024 flll full and final realtzaflon of the clatm amount.

¶35

(2) Amount, if any, patd by the defendants ln the loan accounts or amount, tf any, recovered by the appticant Bank after flllng of the O.A. the same be taken into account while arrlvlng at the exact amount of dues/debt payable by the defendants. Accordangly, pendent lite and future interest shall be calculated on the reduced amount.

¶36

(3) Defendants are debarred from dtspostng, allenaflng or dealtng wlth any of the properties belonging to them flll the aforesald decretal debt is recovered from the defendants.

¶37

(4) Defendants are gtven a time of thtrty days from the date of the JudgmenvFinal Order for repaylng of the above mention€d dues, so intimated to them. In case the defendants fall to pay the dues wtthln the above mentioned ume, the app[cant Bank ls entltled to recover lts dues by sale of secured assets, lf any. Appllcant Bank Is also entitled to proceed against personal properties of the defendants (Both movable and lmmovable) and also p.oceed against the defendants personally to recover the dues ln accordance wlth law.

¶38

¶39

(s)Let the Certlf,cate of Recovery be drawn up by^{Ld'Reglstrar forthwlth ln terms of} Judgment for lssuance^{of thesame against defendantsln favour of theAppllcant} Bank under Sectlon 19(22) of^{the Recovery of Debts andBankruptcyAct, 1993and} put up the same for lssuance of the Certlflcate.

¶40

(5) Ld. Recovery Offlcer shall reallze the amount as^{per the Recoverycertlflcatefrom} the defendants ln accordance^{wlth law.}

¶41

(7) Ld. Reglstrar of thls Tribun.l ls dlrected to dellver Recovery^{Certlflcateln term of the} flnal order/judgment for recovery of the^{sum agalnstthe defendants ln favour of the} Appllcant Bank under Sectlon 19(22) of^{theRecoveryof Debts due to theBankand} Financlal Institutlons Act, 1993^{now knownas Recoveryof DebtsandBankruptcy} Ad, 1993.

¶42

(8) The partles are dlrected to appear before the Recovery Olficet on 14/07/2025^fot further action ln accordance wlth^{law ln the eventthe entlre amount ls not pald by} the sald date.

¶43

Accordlngly, the Orlginal ApPllcatlon, belng^{O.A. No. 508 of 2024, ls allowedand} stands dlsposed of.

¶44

Copy of the JudgmenvFlnal Order be uploaded^{ln theTrlbunal's webslte.}

¶45

File is consigned to the Record^Room.

¶46

(Dictated to steno, iranscnbed bY him, conected, signed and

¶47

pronounced by me ln the open court on thls the 10u daY of lune,²⁰²⁵⁾

¶48

( KAMAL DE )^-- PRESIOING OFFICER.

¶49

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

¶50

o.A.s08of202	4 TheKarurvysyaBankLlmlted Vs. Mr,Sunil Sharma &Or9.
Dateoforder	order withslgnature
OrderNo,08 Dt.10/06/2025 mb	Order^{pronounced (vide separate sheets).} In theresult,o.A.508of^{2024isallowedwithcosts,Issue} RecoveryCertificate^accordingly.
	t^rama-ioe) . PresidingOfficer DRT-3,Kolkata

Karur Vysya Bank v. Sunil Sharma and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. Sunil Sharma and Ors.

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 Baroda versus Ms Park International Teleservices Private Limited and Ors.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Ajit Adhikary and Anr.

Uco Bank versus Goutam Karmakar

Uco Bank versus Gupta Traders and Ors.

Indian Bank versus Ms Lederkem Inc. and Ors.

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Pratidin Marketing and Company and Anr.