Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Mrs. Geeta Soni W/O Mr. Rajesh Soni

DRT22 Jul 2025OA/932/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues of approximately Rs. 1.1 crore from borrowers who defaulted on term loans. The court granted a recovery certificate and restrained the defendants from alienating mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 1.1 cr + 9.55% interest; restrained from alienating assets.

Central Bank of India versus Mrs. Geeta Soni W/O Mr. Rajesh Soni — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

CONTD. ORDER - SHEET

PAGE NO

CASE NO

DATE	DESCRIPTION OFTHEORDER	REMARK
72t07/75	Judgment pronouncedintheOpenCourtCamp at Raipur.CopyofJudgment beissuedtothePartiesas perrutes.Recordbeconsignedto theRecordRoom. (Ram tet) Presidi officer DRT: Jabatpur CampCourt:Raipur	fio nio,u, ^li/ L,3liiiFSr

¶5

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶6

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶7

CAMP COURT AT RATPUR^(C.G.)

¶8

(Presiding Officer - Hon'b[e Shri Ram Niwas Patet)

¶9

Originol APPlication No.^- 932123 '

¶10

Central Bank of lndia, Vivek Comptex, Vijay Marg, Ambikapur, Distt.-Surguja^(C.G.)497001

¶11

Applicant

¶12

Versus

¶13

Mrs. Geeta Soni, 01 ) W/o Mr. Rajesh Soni

¶14

Mr. Rajesh Soni, 5/o Shri Vishwanath Soni

¶15

(Both at Khajur Para, Ashirwad Vitta, Brahma Road, Ambikapur, Distt.^-Surguja, C.G. 497001 ) Defendants

¶16

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Sanjeev Dubey,^Advocate Defendants : Ex-parte

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

(oatetl7fd.t u ty, zoz s )

¶19

The Applicant-Bank has fited the^present Original Application u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on^{11 /08/23 against the} Defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,10,21,887.60^(Rupees One Crore,^{Ten Lakh,} Twenty One Thousand, Eight Hundred Eighty Seven and^{Paisa Sixtyonty)} atong with interest and other reliefs as stated.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of Defendant No.-1 and 2, the Appticant Bank sanctioned Term Loan of Rs.⁹⁵ Lakh in the Year 201 5 Term Loan of Rs. 79 Lakh in the Year 2016^whichwas further restructured as Term Loan-l of Rs.45.96 Lakh, Term Loan-ll of^Rs. 61 .71 Lakh and WCTL (new) of Rs. 38 Lakh aggregating Rs. 137.67^Lakhon 25109119. ln consideration of the sanction of credit facitities the Defendant No.-'l and 2 in addition to execution of loan and guarantee documents have also created equitabte mortgage over the immovabte^properties, i.e., atl part and parcel of property Khasra No.-1177l11, admeasuring 0.06 acre at SchooL Road, Gudri Bazar Market, Ambikapur, District-Sarguja^(C.G.);

¶21

¶22

oA932123

¶23

betonging to Defendant No.-1. The Defendant No.-1 and 2 avaited the credit facitities but repayment was not done as per the repayment schedute. The accounts were ctassified as NPA and the Defendants faited to Liquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Notice dated 24/05/21 u/s 13(2) of the Securitisation Act by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex A-1 to A-14 which were proved by Shri Sidhart Kumar, a Chief Manager.

¶24

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 26/11/24. 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 @9.55% p.a. with monthly rests. However, I feet it fair and reasonable to grant interest @9.55% p.a. simpte pendentelite and future titt reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is liabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶25

The Original Apptication is altowed and it is ordered as underi) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatly Rs. 1,10,21,887.60 (Rupees One Crore, Ten Lakh, Twenty One Thousand, Eight Hundred Eighty Seven and Paisa Sixty on[y) together with pendentetite and future interest @9.55%^per annum simple from the date of fiting of the OA, i.e.,11/08/23, with costs titl its reatization.

¶26

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitled to se[[ the mortgaged as wetl as personat properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depteting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way deating with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶27

iii) A Recovery Certificate be issued uls 19(27) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The applicant bank may file a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶28

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this Day of 22nd Ju[y, 2025 at Camp Court Raipur.

¶29

25 6l (Ram Niwas Patet) Presidine 0fficer

Central Bank of India v. Mrs. Geeta Soni W/O Mr. Rajesh Soni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Mrs. Geeta Soni W/O Mr. Rajesh Soni

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

Central Bank of India versus Shri Madhusudan Singh

State Bank of India versus Kishor Shopping Mall Private Ltd.

Central Bank of India versus M/s Pitamber Filing Station, through Its Proprietor- Shri Anil Kumar Singh

Central Bank of India versus M/S Polytech India through Its Partners Sonam Agrawal , Yashvardhan Agrawal

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shambhavi Agencies through Its Propreitor Praveen Padmaker

Uco Bank versus Pusha Rajesh Jha