Allowed

Punjab National Bank (E-Obc) v. Ms. Shahzadi Begum

DRT15 Mar 2025TA/823/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by a public sector bank for recovery of loan dues. The court held the defendants were liable to repay the principal amount along with interest and directed recovery from the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 20,05,417 with interest within 70 days; recovery to be effected from sale of mortgaged property and other assets if not paid.

Punjab National Bank (E-Obc) versus Ms. Shahzadi Begum — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.823 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. 823 of 2023

¶5

Punjab National Bank (e-Oriental Bank of Commerce) Circle Sastra East Delhi CSC, 1st Floor, Pocket-E, Mayur Vihar Phase-II, Delhi-110091 Applicant Versus 1. Ms Shahzadi Begum w/o Mohd. Salim Siddiqui Proprietress M/s Global Overseas Flat No.S-1, B-175, Block-B, Front side 2nd Floor, Shalimar Garden Extn-II Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP-201005 Also at: F-7/B-4, Block-F, Ambika Apartment Dilshad Colony, Delhi-110095 Also at: 95/2, New Kardampuri Extn. Babarpur, Shandara, Delhi-110094 2. Moinuddin Siddiqui s/o Mohd. Salim Siddiqui Flat No.S-1, B-175, Block-B„ Front side 2nd Floor, Shalimar Garden Extn-II Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP-201005 Also at: F-7/B-5, Top floor, Block-F, Ambika Apartment, Dilshad Colony Delhi-110095 Also at: Moinuddin Siddiqui, Proprietor Satyam Shelters & Associates A-13, Ground Floor, Sector-12

T.A. No.823 of 2023

Noida, UP-201301

Defendants

Present: Sh.Satish Kashyap, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶10

Date of Institution: 08.39.2021

¶11

Date of Pronouncement: 15.03.2025

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 08.09.2021 through Shri Akhouri Binay, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (as amended) against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.20,05,417/(Rupees Twenty Lacs Five Thousand Four Hundred Seventeen only) as on 10.08.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @12.75% per annum in with monthly rests from 11.08.2021 till the date of its realization and costs.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 and 2 being borrower and co-borrower, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan Facility of Rs.14,00,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lacs only) to be repaid in 240 equated monthly installments commencing from 01.05.2010 to purchase a property bearing Flat No.S-1, B-175, Block-B, Front Side, 2nd Floor, Shalimar Garden Extn-II, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP-201005.

¶15

That in order to avail the said loan facility, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Agreement of Term Loan for Immovable property, Common Agreement, Affidavit all dated 31.03.2010 in favour of applicant bank.

¶16

T.A. No.823 of 2023

¶17

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendants created equitable property by depositing title deeds of Flat No.S-1, B-175, Block-B, Front Side, 2^{ndFloor, Shalimar Garden} Extn-II, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP-201005 on 30.04.2010 in favour of the applicant bank which was confirmed by defendant no.1 by executing letter.

¶18

The defendants acknowledged balance and security confirmation acknowledging their liability towards applicant bank on 28.01.2014.

¶19

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and comply with the terms and conditions of loan despite several requests and reminders to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.05.2018 but defendants could not regularize the accounts, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶20

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitizat: on and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 01.06.2018 was issued to the defendants calling upon them to regularize the account but defendants failed. Applicant bank issued possession notice under Section 13(4) dated 27.11.2018 and took symbolic possession of the property.

¶21

The defendant no.2 filed SA no.28/2019 titled Moinuddin Siddiqui & Another Vs Authorized Officer OBC/PNB which was pending before Hon'ble DRT Lucknow.

¶22

cc/

¶23

T.A. No.823 of 2023

¶24

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 01.07.2024, 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.

¶25

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Akhouri Binay, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Copy of Power of Attorney EX.AW-1/1 (OSR), Gazette Notification EX.AW-1/2, Loan Application Form EX.AW1/3(OSR), Agreement of Term Loan for Immovable property EX.AW-1/4 (OSR), Common Agreement EX.AW-1/5(OSR), Affidavit dated 31.03.2010 EX.AW-1/6 (OSR), Sale deed dated 08.04.2010 EX.AW-1/7 (OSR), Letter dated 30.04.2010 EX.AW1/8(OSR), Balance & Security Confirmation Letter dated 28.01.2014 EX.AW-1/9 (OSR), Notice u/s 13(2) anci postal receipts EX.AW-1/10 (OSR), Notice u/s 13(4) EX.AW-1/11 (OSR), Statement of Account EX.AW-1/12, Certificates under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 EX.AW-1/13, Certificates under Section 2A(b) of the Banker's Books Evidence Act EX.AW-1/14.

¶26

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.

¶27

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

¶28

T.A. No.823 of 2023

¶29

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

¶30

ORDER

¶31

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 70 days, a sum of Rs.20,05,417 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Five Thousand Four Hundred Seventeen only) as on 10.08.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @12.75% per annum with monthly rests from 11.08.2021 till its realization with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged property bearing Flat No.S-1, B-175, BlockB, Front Side, 2nd Floor, Shalimar Garden Extn-II, Sal - ibabad, Ghaziabad, UP-201005. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶32

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

¶33

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 14.05.2025.

¶34

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

¶35

(GOVIND BALLABH MIR MA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶36

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 15.03.2025

Punjab National Bank (E-Obc) v. Ms. Shahzadi Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank (E-Obc) v. Ms. Shahzadi Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anvar a versus Federal Bank

Mohammed Sageer T K versus South Indian Bank

Ms Sr Educational and Charitable Trust versus Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd.

Canara Bank versus M/S Radhey Radhey Timber

Punjab National Bank versus Mrs. Neelu Kapoor

Ms Bhushan Trading Co. versus the Citizens Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.