Allowed

State Bank of India v. Vardhan Industries

DRT29 Apr 2025OA/780/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur, allowed the applicant bank's application filed under s. 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The court decreed recovery of principal, interest, and costs, ordered the issuance of a recovery certificate, and granted an injunction restraining the defaulters from alienating their assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 56,07,019.00 plus pendentente interest at 11.75% p.a., costs; issuance of Recovery Certificate under s. 19(22); injunction restraining alienation of properties.

State Bank of India versus Vardhan Industries — Execution and Attachment | 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,^- 78012i

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 3td Ftoor, Zonat Office, Vijay Nagar, Jabatpur (M.P.)

¶6

Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Vardhan lndustries,

¶9

01 ) Prop.^-SuniI Kumar Meshram, Near Barghat Gas Godown, Sathai Kosmi, Barghat, District-Seoni (M.P,) 480667

¶10

020 Sunil Kumar Mishram, S/o Bhaiyalal Meshram, R/o Ward No.-3, Shanti Nagar, Barghat, Distt.-Seonj (M.P.) 480667

¶11

..... Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Akhitesh Choubey, Advocate

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

(Dated : 29th April, 2025)

¶16

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 19106123 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 56,07,019.00 (Rupees Fifty Six Lakh, Seven Thousand and Nineteen only) along with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 through its Proprietor Defendant No.-2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 35 Lakh on 11/02/20 and Working Capital Term Loan under GECL of Rs. 7 Lakh on 20108170. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facitities the Defendants in addition to execution of loan documents have aLso created equitabte mortgage over the immovable property, i.e., Diverted Land/House situated at Mouza Kosmi, P.C. 10, RIC & Tehsi[-Barghat, Distt.-Seoni (M.P.) bearing Kh. No.-202/27 area 0.02 Hect. or (28.5+371/2, (71+59)17 = 1966.25 sq.ft./182.73 sq.mtr., commercial plot & RCC Godown. The Defendants avarled the credit facitities but faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Legal Notice on 21 /04123

¶18

¶19

o4780t23

¶20

by the Appticant Bank. The Applicant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-l to A-1'l which were proved by Shri Ashwani Sharma, Chief Manager.

¶21

ln response to notice served upon the Defendants, Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra Advocate fited his Vakatatnama on behatf of the Defendants on 18/12/23 before the registry of this Tribunal however, neither appeared in the later proceedings nor fited written statement. The Defendants were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 06/09124, 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 severatly tiabte to pay the ctaim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has ctaimed interest @1'l .75% p.a. with monthty rests. However, I feel it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @11.75% p.a. simpte pendentetite and future tit[ reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sold for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶22

The Original Apptication is a[towed and it is ordered as under-

¶23

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severalty Rs. 56,07,019.00 (Rupees Fifty Six Lakh, Seven Thousand and Nineteen onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @11 .75% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,19/06/73, with costs titt its reatization.

¶24

ii) The Appticant Bank is ent.itted to sett the mortgaged as we[ as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for realization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way deating with their properties/assets without first paying the cla.im of the Appticant Bank.

¶25

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

¶26

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 29th Day of Aprit, 20

¶27

-/4^,2-3 (Ram Niwas Patet) Presidine 0fficer

State Bank of India v. Vardhan Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Vardhan Industries

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

State Bank of India versus Namita Raghuvanshi

Bank of India versus Subhash

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Agritech Auto World

Hdfc Bank versus Rakesh Singh

Mukesh Dongre versus Iquitas Small Finance Bank Ltd.

Bank of India versus M/S Mahamayaa Agro Tech