Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Inox Tubes Pvt. Ltd.

DRT14 Jan 2025TA/534/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank against borrowers and guarantors for recovery of overdue dues. The court reduced the interest rate from 18% to 12% annually. The defendants were directed to pay the principal sum and reduced interest within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.4,91,65,105.30 plus 12% p.a. interest from 01.06.2019 with recovery from sale of hypothecated/pledged assets.

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Inox Tubes Pvt. Ltd. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.534 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. 534 of 2023

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd. Department for Special Operations 5th Floor, Ansal Classique Tower Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027 Applicant
Versus
1.M/s Inox Tubes Pvt.Ltd. (Borrower/ Mortgagor) G-39, DDA Flats Behind Raghushree Market Ajmeri Gate, Delhi-110006 Also at: Plot No.4, Industrial Extn. Area Kathua, Jammu & Kashmir
2.Sh.Hanwantraj Harakchand Doshi s/o Harakchand Doshi (Guarantor / Mortgagor) A-11, Bijli Apartments, G T Karnal Road Delhi-110009
3.Sh.Sanjay Kumar Doshi s/o Hanawat Rai Doshi Guarantor A-11, Bijli Apartments, G T Karnal Road Delhi-110009
4.Ms Manjula Devi D/o Sh.Pukhraj Dharmaji Jain (Guarantor/Mortgagor) A-11, Bijli Apartments, G T Karnal Road Delhi-110009 Defendants
Present: Sh.Shubham Mishra, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 27.06.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 14.01.2025 ctf

¶6

T.A. No.534 of 2023

¶7

FINAL ORDER

¶8

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 27.06.2019 before DRT-III, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Sanjay Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act,1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,91,65,105.30 (Rupees Four Crore Ninety One Lacs Sixty Five Thousand One Hundred Five & paisa Thirty only) as on 31.05.2019 together with pendentelite and future interest @18% per annum from 01.06.2019 till its realization with costs.

¶9

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant No.1 through its directors being defendant no.2 & 3 vide loan application dated 04.07.2015, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit limit of Rs.380.00 lacs (within which LC of Rs.80.00 lacs), Term Loan of Rs.20.00 lacs on 26.08.2015 @11.00% rate of interest against hypothecation of stock, book debts and two immovable properties owned by defendant no.1, 2 and 4 and limits were last renewed on 27.09.2016 @10.60% interest. The defendant no.4 stood as guarantor for the loan facilities availed by defendant no.1. The loan facilities were sanctioned in order to take over of loan account from Indusind Bank and applicant bank disbursed an amount of Rs.265.00 lacs to close their account with IDFC Bank on 14.10.2015 as per Board Resolution dated 26.08.2015 of defendant no.1.

¶10

That in order to avail the said loan facilities, the defendant no.1 through defendant no.2 executed Master Facility greement, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Hypothecation •f Stocks and Book Debts, Letter of Continuing Guarantee, ower of Attorney, Term Loan Agreement, Letter of Continuity nd Undertaking cum Indemnity on 26.08.2015 and 27.09.2016

¶11

T.A. No.534 of 2023

¶12

along with Amendment Agreement etc. in favour of applicant bank.

¶13

In order to secure the credit facilities availed by defendant no.1, the defendant no.2, 3 and 4 deposited title documents of the following properties in order to create equitable mortgage in favour of applicant bank and executed Deed of Indemnity dated 26.08.2015 and Declaration cum Indemnity on 01.12.2015:

¶14

Industrial property measuring 4 Kanals, 10 Marls, Industrial Extension Area, Kathua, Jammu & Kashmir owned by defendant no.1;

¶15

Residential property bearing no.A-11, Bijli Apartment, 2nd Floor, G.T.Karnal Road, New Delhi owned by defendant no.2 and 4.

¶16

In addition to this, the defendant no.1 furnished Memorandum relating to first charge over fixed deposit of Rs.16.00 lacs as continuing security in favour of applicant bank on 26.08.2015.

¶17

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to honor its commitments as per terms and conditions of the sanction and failed to repay the overdue interest despite regular follow up. Ultimately, the applicant bank called upon the defendants to pay the entire outstanding dues to the applicant bank. The applicant bank issued loan recall notice dated 18.04.2018 for Rs.3,99,44,812.81 as of 31.03.2018 withdrawing the credit facilities availed by defendant no.1 and invoked the guarantee given by guarantors to clear the outstanding dues but defendants failed to do so, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶18

T.A. No.534 of 2023

¶19

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 doted 09.12.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶20

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Sanjay Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Board Resolution Exh.AW-1/1, Loan Application Form Exh.AW-1/2, Sanction Letter Exh.AW-1/3, Board Resolution Exh.AW-1/4, Master Facility Agreement Exh.AW1/5, Letter of Hypothecation Exh.AW-1/6, Power of Attorney for Book Debts Exh.AW-1/7, Term Loan Agreement Exh.AW-1/8, Letter of Continuing Guarantee Exh.AW-1/9, Undertaking cum Indemnity Exh.AW-1/10, Demand Promissory Note Exh.AW1/11, 1/12 & 1/21, No Dues Certificate and Satisfaction of Charge Exh.AW-1/13(colly), Declaration cum Indemnity Exh.AW-1/14, Memorandum for Mortgage Exh.AW-1/15, Deed of Indemnity Exh.AW-1/16, Memorandum for Charge over FD Exh.AW-1/17, Renewal Request Exh.AW-1/18, Sanction Letter dated 27.09.2016 Exh.AW-1/19, Amendment Agreement Exh.AW-1/20, Loan Recall Notice Exh.AW-1/22(colly), Certificate under Bankers Book of EvAence Act Exh.AW1/23(colly), Valuation reports Exh.AW-1/24, Deeds of Mortgaged Properties Exh.AW-1/25(colly).

¶21

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

¶22

T.A. No.534 of 2023

¶23

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.

¶24

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶25

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

¶26

ORDER

¶27

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.4,91,65,105.30 (Rupees Four Crore Ninety One Lacs Sixty Five Thousand One Hundred Five & paisa Thirty only) together with @12% interest per an ,um pendentelite and future interest from 01.06.2019 till the date of realization failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stocks, book debts and adjustment of pledged

¶28

sof

¶29

T.A. No.534 of 2023

¶30

FDRs of defendants and mortgaged properties kept as collateral security:

¶31

Industrial property measuring 4 Kanals, 10 Marls, Industrial Extension Area, Kathua, Jammu & Kashmir owned by defendant no.1;

¶32

Residential property bearing no.A-11, Bijli Apartment, 2nd Floor, G.T.Karnal Road, New Delhi owned by defendant no.2 and 4.

¶33

In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of tne defendants.

¶34

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

¶35

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 17.03.2025

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 14.01.2025

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Inox Tubes Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Inox Tubes Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Hiteshi Enterprises

Central Bank of India versus M/S D.S. Impex

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S the Global Fashion Culture

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Raj Bala Bhardwaj

Canara Bank versus M/S Reenak Footwear

Central Bank of India versus Sh.Inderjeet Singh