Allowed

State Bank of India v. Kamal Kumar Chimnani

DRT30 Jan 2025OA/567/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 RD&BS Act for recovery of dues from respondents who borrowed home loans and mortgages failed to pay, granting interest and a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 45,62,627.00 with interest at 8.5% p.a.; mortgaged and personal properties to be set off; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

State Bank of India versus Kamal Kumar Chimnani — 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

Originol Applicotion No. - 567/22

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Btock B-1, Pujari Chamber, Pachpedi Naka, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.)

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shri KamaL Kumar Chimnani, S/o Shri Ramesh La[ Chimnani

¶9

Smt. Mamta Chimnani, W/o Shri Kamat Kumar Chimnani

¶10

(Both at Ftat No. M-602, Sixth Ftoor,

¶11

Matri Chhaya Apartments, Priyadarshini Cotony, Tikrapara, Near Pachpedi Naka, Rajednra Prasad Ward No.-46, Raipur, C.G. 492001) Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Jagbandan Patel, Advocate

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT 1^{oated : -orla} n uafi zo z s ;

¶15

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Origina[ Application uls 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 07/05/22 against the Defendants for recovery ol Rs. 45,67,622.00^(Rupees Fourty Five Lakh, Sixty Two Thousand, Six Hundred and Twenty Two onty) atong^with interest^and other retiefs as stated.

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 and 2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Home Loan of^Rs. 25.80 Lakh on 23101 /17 and Home Top'up Loan of^{Rs. 14.20 Lakh on} 23/01 /17. In consideration of the sanction of credit facitities^{the Defendants} in addition to execution of loan documents have^{atso createdequitable} mortgage over the immovabte^property, i.e.,^{Att part and parcel of} immovable property situated at F[at No.^{M-602,Sixth Floor,MatriChhaya} Apartments, Priyadarshini Cotony, Tikrapara,^{Near PachpediNaka, Rajendra} Prasad Ward No.-46, Patwari Hatka No.-114,^{Raipur (C.G.), area 1325 sq.ft.}

¶17

¶18

oA 567 t22

¶19

The Defendants avaited the credit facitities and also acknowtedged the debt through their Letter daled 06/12120 but faiLed to liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Legal Notice on08/01/22 by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has relied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-12 which were proved by Shri Shantanu Dasgupta, Chief Manager.

¶20

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 04/07 124. 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 severatty liable to pay the claim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has claimed interest at contractua[ rate but has not specified the prevaiting rate of interest. However, lfeel it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @8.5% p.a. simpLe pendente[ite and future ti[[ rea[ization of the dues. The mortgaged property is liabte to be sold 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 underi) The Defendants do pay^jointty and severatly Rs. 45,62,627.00 (Rupees Fourty Five Lakh, Sixty Two Thousand, Six Hundred and Twenty Two only) together with pendentelite and future interest @8.5% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,07/05/22, with costs titl its realization.

¶22

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the mortgaged as wetl 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, alienating or in any way dealing^with their properties/assets without first^paying the claim of the Applicant^Bank.

¶23

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

¶24

Judgment pronounced in the open court^{on this 30th Day of January, 2025.}

¶25

o⁷⁹ 2 ' o (Ram Ni AS P Presidinq Officer

State Bank of India v. Kamal Kumar Chimnani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Kamal Kumar Chimnani

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 Nakoda Traders

State Bank of India versus M/S Shri Sidhhi Vinayak Plywood

Shree Mahalakshmi Namkin through its Proprietor Rajkumar Sharma versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Ms Harishyam Engineering

Ms J K Traders versus Indian Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Ashoke Shrivastava