Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S R.S. Offset Printers

DRT22 Jan 2025TA/1073/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Indian Overseas Bank against three respondents for recovery of outstanding dues totaling Rs. 51.99 lakhs along with interest. The defendants appeared in absentia, and the application proceeded ex-parte based on the bank's uncontradicted documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay Rs. 51.99 lakhs with interest within 30 days; direction for recovery from hypothecated and other properties upon default; issuance of recovery certificate.

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S R.S. Offset Printers — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.1073 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 1073 of 2023

¶5

Indian Overseas Bank A-172, Preet Vihar, Delhi — 110092 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s R.S.Offset Printers 67, Patparganj Industrial Area Delhi - 110092

¶8

Smt. Sangeeta Gupta w/o Sh.Praveen Gupta Partner of M/s R.S.Offset Printers R/o G-356, First Floor, Preet Vihar Delhi-110092

¶9

Sh.Praveen Gupta @ Parveen Gupta s/o Sh.Rajeshwar Prasad Gupta Partner of M/s R.S.Offset Printers R/o G-356, First Floor, Preet Vihar Delhi-110092 Defendants

¶10

Present: Shri Prem Chhetri, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 19.08.2020 Date of Pronouncement \ 22.01.2025

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 19.08.2020 through Shri Sanjay Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank, under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 read with Rule 8

¶13

T.A. No.1073 of 2023

¶14

of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Rules 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.51,99,719/-(Rupees Fifty One Lacs Ninety Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Nineteen only) as on 31.07.2020 along with interest @10.8J% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till its realization and costs.

¶15

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 being partnership firm of defendant no.2 and 3 vide their loan application dated 4th September 2017 along with related documents, the applicant bank sanctioned Cas:1 Credit facility of Rs.35.00 lacs (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs only) against hypothecation of stocks & book debts and Term Loan of Rs.40.00 lacs (Rupees Forty Lacs only) on 05.10.2017 towards purchase of used Komari machinery with interest @10.90% per annum subject to change from time to time as per bank's guidelines covered under CGTMSE cover. The term loan was to be repayable in 60 EMI of Rs.86,771/- after a morator:Jm of 3 months.

¶16

That in order to avail the said loan facilities, the defendants executed Demand Promissory Notes, Term Loan Agreement, Letter of Hypothecation, Hypothecation of Book Debts, Letter of Undertaking Repayment in Instalments, Undertaking and Guarantee Deed dated 05.10.2017 for guaranteeing the repayment of entire loan sanctioned in favour of defendant no.1.

¶17

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that in order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants executed hypothecation of stocks, book debts & machinery purchased from term loan availed in favour of the applicant bank.

¶18

T.A. No.1073 of 2023

¶19

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions and despite of several requests and reminders the defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues. Ultimately, the applicant bank calling upon the defendants to pay the entire dues but the defendants neglected to clear the dues of the applicant bank. The account was declared NPA on 31.01.2020 by the applicant bank as per RBI guidelines and issued recall notice dated 03.02.2020 to clear the dues but to no avail. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶20

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 05.09.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶21

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Sanjay Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Ex.PW1/1, Loan Applicant with Assets & Liabilities Statement, Aadhar Card etc. Ex.PW1/2(Colly), Credit Sanction Advice Ex.PW1/3, DP Note Ex.PW1/4 & PW1/5, Term Loan Agreement Ex.PW1/6, Letter of Hypothecation Ex.PW1/7, Hypothecation of Book Debts Ex.PW1/8, Letter of Undertaking Reg Repayment in Installments Ex.PW1/9, Letter of Undertaking Ex.PW1/10, Guarantee Deed Ex.PW1/11, Recall Notice dated 03.02.2020 Ex.PW1/12(colly), Certified Statement of Account as per

¶22

T.A. No.1073 of 2023

¶23

Banker's Book of Evidence Act Ex.PW1/13, Computation Sheet of Statement of Account Ex.PW1/14.

¶24

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶25

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts

¶26

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶27

ORDER

¶28

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants, jointly or severally, to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.51,99,719/-(Rupees Fifty One Lacs Ninety Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Nineteen only) along with interest @10.85% per annum pendentelite and future interest with monthly rest from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of the hypothecated stocks, book debts and machinery purchased out of term loan availed. In case of default, the same shall be recovered from sale of the moveable and immovable properties of defendants.

¶29

cd-

¶30

T.A. No.1073 of 2023

¶31

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶32

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 24.03.2025.

¶33

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶34

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶35

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 22.01.2025

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S R.S. Offset Printers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S R.S. Offset Printers

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

Hdfc Bank versus Saraj Singh

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Ishtiyaq Ahmad Kasana

Ashok Kumar versus Punjab National Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Janaki Traders and Ors.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S S G India Auto Dealer

The South Indian Bank Limited versus M/S Als Satellite Education Private Limited