Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/s Deepak Traders

DRT3 Jan 2025OA/585/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application to recover Rs. 59 lakh plus interest. Ruling that evidence on affidavit and banker's books established the debt, with no denial from the borrower or guarantors, the tribunal determined liability and issued a recovery certificate allowing sale of secured assets.

What did the court decide?

Debt determined at Rs. 59,08,718.49 with interest; recovery certificate issued against borrower and guarantors for payment from secured assets.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/s Deepak Traders — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DRT,PATNA

¶2

OA 585 of20221JI

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶4

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶5

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶6

OA Case No. 585 of 2022

¶7

HDFC Bank Limited. branch office at Bimla Sadan, Holding no. 801/432. Ward no. 37, Exhibition Road, Patna 800001.

¶8

....... Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

I. M/s Deepak Traders, a proprietorship concern, through its proprietor. Deepak Kumar Kanodia, having its unit/shop at Ho. No. 611100, Sakhichand Ghat Road, Naya Bazar, Bhagalpur, P.O.- Bhagalpur, District- Bhagalpur- 81200I, Bihar

¶11

Deepak Kumar Kanodia (Proprietor/Guarantor), son ofDilip Kumar Kanodia, residing at Town/village/gram- 401, Pratibha, Ashraya, Manik Sarkar Ghat Road, Near Deepprabha Cinema Hall. Dampur, Jagdishpur, Bhagalpur, District- Bhagalpur- 812001, Bihar,

¶12

Also atHo. No. 611100, Sakhichand Ghat Road, Naya Bazar, Bhagalpur, P.O.- Bhagalpur, District- Bhagalpur- 812001, Bihar

¶13

Vishnu Kanodia alias Vishnu Kumar Kanodia(Guarantor/Mortgager). son of Late Shankar Danodia, residing at Town/village/gram- 401. Pratibha, Ashraya, Manik Sarkar Ghat Road, Near Deepprabha Cinema Hall, Dampur, Jagdishpur, Bhagalpur, District- Bhagalpur- 812001, Bihar,

¶14

Also atresiding at Town/village/gramPurani Chok Amarpur, Amarpur, Banka, District- Banka- 813101, Bihar.

¶15

. Defendants

¶16

Present:

¶17

For the Applicant Shri Bhola Shankar, Advocate For the Defendants Shri Manish Kishore, Advocate

¶18

Dated:03.0 1.2025

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

I. The Applicant bank has made this application U/S 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on

~o\ o

OA 585 of20221JI

DRT,PATNA

2S.10.2022 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.S9,08,718.49 as on 30.04.2022 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 01.0S.2022with costs till realization.

¶26

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant.

¶27

Defendant no.l is a proprietorship concern of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendant no. 2 and 3 are the guarantors of the loans facilities obtained by the defendant no.l.

¶28

Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanction of cash credit facility of Rs.SO Lakh vide loan application dated 26.09.2018, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 12.10.2018 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created equitable mortgage in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA.

¶29

Defendants again approached the applicant bank for renewal of the said cash credit facility, which was renewed by the applicant bank on 2S.11.2019. Defendants further approached the applicant bank for additional fund WCTL of Rs.IO Lakh under GECL scheme, which was granted by the applicant bank on IS.11.2020 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created/extended equitable mortgage in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA. The said loan facilities were also renewed by the applicant bank on 07.12.2020.

¶30

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank. in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 04.04.2022.

DRT,PATNA

OA 585of20221JI

Since, the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶35

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.59,08,718.49 as on 30.04.2022 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 01.05.2022 till the realization.

¶36

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 27.12.2022, requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service V/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993.

¶37

In response to the notice the defendant no.I and 2 have appeared on 20.022023 but despite the service of registered summon/notice, the defendant no.3 has not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendant no.3 to defend the case, but he failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the defendant no.3 is proceeded ex-parte.

¶38

Defendant no.I and 2 have failed to file their written statement within the statutory period hence vide order dated 24.01.2024, opportunity to tile the same was closed and the defendants were given liberty to tile the rebuttal evidence. The same has also not been filed hence on 16.12.2024 final arguments of the parties were heard and the case was reserved for order/judgment. The parties were again granted IS days' time to file written notes of arguments, but the same has not been filed.

¶39

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Pappu Thakur, Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶40

SI.No	Description Documents Photocopies	of	Date of Execution	Amount (In Lakh)	Signature Executants	of ..--	Ex.! Ann. No. _--

OA 585 of20221JI

DRT. PATNA

I	Loan application	26.09.2018	--	Def.no.I&2		I
2	Sanction letter	12.10.2018	50.00	Bank accepted def.no.I&2	and by	2
3	Master facility agreement	06.11.2018	50.00	Def.no.I&2		3
4	Letter of continuing guarantee	06.11.2018	50.00	Def.no.2&3		4
5	Deed of hypothecation	06.11.2018	50.00	Def.no.I&2		5
6	Power of attorney	06.11.2018	--	Def.no.I&2		6
7	Photocopy of mortgaged documents	--	--	--		7
8	Memorandum recording past transaction of creation of mortgage by delivery of title deeds	06.11.2018	--	Def.no.2&3		8
9	Renewal sanction letter	25.11.2019	50.00	Bank accepted def.no.I&2	and by	9
10	Sanction letter (GECL)	15.11.2020	10.00	Bank accepted def.no.I&2	and by	10
II	Declaration cum undertaking	16.10.2020	10.00	Def.no.I&2		11
12	Facility cum hypothecation agreement	16.10.2020	10.00	Def.no.I&2		12
13	Supplemental deed of simple mortgage	16.10.2020	50.00 10.00	Def.no.3		13
14	Memorandum recording past transaction of creation of mortgage by delivery of title deeds	16.10.2020	50.00 10.00	Def.no.3		14
IS	Renewal sanction letter	07.12.2020	50.00 10.00	Bank accepted def.no.l&2	and by	IS
16	Recall cum demand notice	17.06.2022	--	Bank		16
17 & 18	Statement of accounts and certificate	--	--	Bank		17 & 18

¶45

Heard arguments and perused the case record. During the course of arguments, there is no any specific denial on behalf of the defendants with regards to the sanction of loan facilities and its utilization and further there is no any specific denial with regards to the execution of loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank.

DRT, PATNA

OA S8S of 20221J I

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loans and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loans. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶50

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶51

II. It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶52

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 04.04.2022, whereas the present application has been filed on 25.10.2022. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶53

Shri Pappu Thakur, Manager of the applicant bank, has tiled the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶54

Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (I) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

ORT. PATNA

OA 585 of20221JI

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993,providesthat if the defendantdenieshis liabilityto pay the claim made by the applicant,the tribunalmay act upon the affidavitof the applicantwho is acquaintedwith the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the applicationand the documentsas evidence.

¶59

The rule 12 (II) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisionscontainedin section4 of the Banker'sBooksevidence that Act, 1891(18 of 1891)shall applyto a certifiedcopy of an entry in a Banker's Books furnishedalong with applicationtiled undersubsection1of section19bythe applicant.

¶60

Section 4 of Banker's Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as under- S.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers' book~~~<;uhjectto the provisions of this Act. a certified copy of any entry in a banker's book shall ill all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry. and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters. transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where. and to the same extent as. the original entry itself is now hy law admissible, but notfurther or otherwise.

¶61

As such the certified true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence. The statement of account maintained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

¶62

On perusal of the application, documents, affidavit and on consideration of the arguments, it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents. as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account.

¶63

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O.A., was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 30.04.2022 has been proved to be Rs.59,OS,7IS.49 only by way of statement of accounts. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

OA 585 of20221JI

DRT. PATNA

In my view, facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly, the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.59,08,718.49 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10% p.a. simple from 25.10.2022 (The date of tiling of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶68

ORDER

¶69

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.59,08,718.49 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10%p.a. simple from 25.10.2022 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶70

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶71

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery Certificate before the RegistrarlSub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets.

¶72

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants, by sale of mortgaged!

•

DRT.PATNA

OA 585 of20221JI

hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants.

¶78

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT. Patna on 13.02.2025. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶79

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 03 rd day of January, 2025.

¶80

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶81

[KaushalendraYadav1 Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶82

FORM NO ,

¶83

[Sec""""'" 24(11]

¶84

DEBTS RECOVERV TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶85

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA). Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-80002S,

• • F.

Be No, 412025

Case No: OAl58512022

In the M;ltterof

lCH- I) HDFC BANK LIMITED

¶92

BRANCH OF SIMLA SADAN, HOLDING NO 801 432 WARD NO 37. FXHIRITION ROAD

AppIicaDt(s)

PATNA.BIHAR -0

--Venus---

To,

(CD- I) MIS DEEPAK TRADERS.

¶98

a prupriclon;hill concern through hs proprietor Dccpak Kumar

¶99

Kanodia

¶100

having its unit/shop at- Ho.no.-6I1I00 Sakhichand Ghat Road, Nuya Bazar, Bhagalpur, PO- Bhagatpur, Bhagatpur ,BIHAR -812001

¶101

{CD- Z) DEEPAK KUMAR KANODIA

¶102

(PROPRIETOR/GUARANTOR)

¶103

SON OF DILIP KUMAR KANODIA RESIDING AT

¶104

TOWN/VILLAGE/GRAM- 401, PRATIBHA. ASHRAYA. MANI'" SARKAR GHAT ROAD, NEAR DEEPPRABHA CINEMA HALL, DAMPUR, }AGDISHPUR, BHAGALPUR,

¶105

DISTRICT- BHAGALPUR - 812201. BIHAR

¶106

Defendant(.)

¶107

Also At.

¶108

AND ALSO AT OEEPAK KUMAR KANODIAH.NO.- 611100,

¶109

SAKHICHAND GHAT ROAD. NAYABAZAR. BHAGALPUR, P_O_-BHAGALPUR.DISTRICT· BHAGALPUR, PIN CODE· 812001 BIHAR

¶110

(CO-3) VISHNU KANODYAALIAS VISHNU KUMAR KANODIA{GUARANTORlMORTGAGOR)

¶111

SON OF LATE SHANKAR DANODIA, RESIDING AT TOWN/VILLAGEiGRAM· 401. PRATIBHA.ASHRAYA,

¶112

MAN1KSARKAR GHAT ROAD, DEEPPRABHACINEMA HALL, DAMPUR.1AGDISHPUR, BHAGALPUR, DISTRICTBHAGALPUR- H12001 BIHAR

¶113

Also At.

¶114

RESIDING ATTOWN/VILLAGEiGRAM - PURANI, CHOK AMARAPUR.AMARPUR, BANKA. DISTRICT- BANAK, PINCODE-813101 BIHAR

¶115

Recov!:n' Cnlificlite (or Rs SlJljR7IR,49 I~ Nip!! I pth! Eight ThOPURd SeveR Hppdml Eightest Apd h'" POrty.1iblLQaly~

¶116

In terms of final order dated 03/0lf2025 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case. it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum ofRs. 5908718.49 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 25/10/2022 i.e. date of filing I with effective date of the OAf 58512022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally fiom the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶117

la.rest
S'''~ CO Name Lo.n Typ. Type/Mode Int. If Rste',t. EfI'ectll'e Da" OrderD.'e jAmOUDt(Rs. LItt_ Typo Order(UODD.tc) Amoaal(RL) Re Iaem·rk
,I MIS DEEPAK TRADERS Simple(Yearly)Interest II<) ! 125/1012022 03/U112025 5908718.49 And -Iy oill.tIy Date nlerestAs n Order 5908718.49
2 (PROPRIETOR/GUARANTOR)DEEPAK KUMAR KANODIA (Yearly)SimpleInterest 1 10 2511012022 0310112025 5908718.49 AodSeverallv oiofly 0':.. In_tAsOrder 5908718.49
VISHNU KANODYA ALIAS VISHNU imple ~ pn_As
KUMAR KANUDIA Interest 110 112511012022 0310112025.5908718.49 And • On!« 5908718.49
(GUARANTURlMORTGAGOR) (Yearly) ! Severally Dot.
I'
In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of
the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable' Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.
The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under
the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act
1993.

¶118

Parties are directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR, Recovery Ofticer. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 1310212025. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 2S to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amended from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors.

¶119

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 03/0112025
RV
MIs ri eglstrar
I\CCOVcry T 'b
Patna fI lInu!

¶120

PRES~ICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶121

¶122

FORM NO. 10

¶123

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶124

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶125

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-80002S.

¶126

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

¶127

RC No. 4/2025

¶128

¶129

Case No: OAl585/2022

¶130

Applicant(s): HDFC BANK LIMITED

¶131

Versus

¶132

Defendant(s): MIS DEEPAK TRADERS

¶133

[Sf:No.__	] Item of Costs - --	Amount in Rs.
!Il.	__JFee on the application	62000
i -	JProcess Fees(Inc. Publication)	0
~: --	JAdvocate Fees	0
1[4. --..,.- .	ICommissionerlReceiverNaluationiSecurity Fee .....J _. , ""._, .., .___ , ' "'' _	0
i~ II	JlMiscelianeous Charges I	10
!I . -..-- ~	jlIotal Costs: Rs.	162000

¶134

Place: PATNA

¶135

Date: 03/01/2025

¶136

PRESID\N<; OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶137

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/s Deepak Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/s Deepak 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

Shri Sushil Ramnivas Sharma versus Bank of India

Ms Mauli Construction Cemaent Depot versus The Washim Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank versus M/s Kritika Agro Industries and Others

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Baby Shukla and another

Punjab National Bank versus M/s D.S. Farm and Others

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Deepak Fuel Centre