Allowed

Idbi Bank v. M/S Taj Marriage Palace

DRT30 Jan 2025OA/760/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues and interest against the defendants and directors. The court ordered the issuance of a recovery certificate for the sale of mortgaged property and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; recovery injunction issued from sale of mortgaged and personal property; recovery certificate to be issued.

Idbi Bank versus M/S Taj Marriage Palace — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 760/2022 Date of Institution: 04.02.2022 Date of Decision: 30.01.2025

¶4

IDBI Bank Ltd., branch office amongst others at Lal Chand and Sons, Talwandi Road, Near Sainik Rest House, Faridkot, Punjab 151203.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

M/s Taj Marriage Palace a proprietorship firm through its proprietor Sh. Rakesh Gandhi, Kotakpura Road, Faridkot, District Faridkot – 151203, Punjab.

¶8

Sh. Rakesh Gandhi S/o Varinder Lal Gandhi, proprietor of M/s Gandhi Tent House, R/o H.No.352, Line Bazar, Opp. Bhaiya Sweets, Faridkot, District Faridkot, Punjab – 151203.

¶9

Smt. Asha Rani W/o Varinder Lal Gandhi, R/o H.No.352, Line Bazar, Opp. Bhaiya Sweets, Faridkot, District Faridkot, Punjab – 151203.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Sh. Sachin Rana, proxy Counsel for Sh. TK Joshi, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants – ex parte

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.36,41,984.84p with interest @8.70% per annum with monthly rests from 04.02.2022

¶14

ORDER

¶15

IDBI Bank Ltd., (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.36,41,984.84p with interest against M/s Taj Marriage Palace and others (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that defendant No.1 is a proprietorship firm and defendant No.2 is its sole proprietor. On 21.09.2016, it had granted a Term Loan of Rs.50.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 through defendant No.2

¶17

¶18

for business purpose. Defendant No.3 had stood guarantor. To secure the loan, Defendant No.3 had also mortgaged her property (fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application) and hypothecated stocks. Further, on 04.09.2020, at the request of defendant No.1 through defendant No.2 bank had sanctioned Working Capital Term Loan of Rs.6.45 Lacs. The loan was chargeable to interest @8.70% per annum with monthly rests. On 04.02.2022, a sum of Rs.36,41,984.84p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 17.05.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 19.07.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Parveen Bansal, Assistant General Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A- 22.

¶21

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the Term Loan of Rs.50.00 Lacs and Working Capital Term Loan of Rs.6.45 Lacs and on 04.02.2022, a sum of Rs.36,41,984.84p was due.

¶22

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.36,41,984.84p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Forty One Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Four and Paisa Eighty Four Only) with interest @8.70% per annum with monthly rests from 04.02.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property and hypothecated stocks fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the

¶23

¶24

application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶25

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 04.03.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and hypothecated stocks as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶26

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶27

Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 30.01.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶28

Pankaj

Idbi Bank v. M/S Taj Marriage Palace

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. M/S Taj Marriage Palace

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

Mani versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Shree Ganpati Logistics and Transport

Hdfc Bank Limited versus by Enterprises

ravinder kaur srivastava versus Icici Bank Limited

Shine P Jacob versus South Indian Bank

Canara Bank versus Ayam Studios Private Limited, Rep. by its Directors