Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Partha Pratim Manna

DRT20 Mar 2026OA/152/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application filed against the legal heir of a deceased borrower. The court determined the debt amount, granted future interest, restricted the defendant from transferring assets, and issued a recovery certificate under the RDB Act.

What did the court decide?

The defendant is directed to pay Rs. 53,43,173.95 as determined debt plus pending and future interest at 13.50% per annum. A recovery certificate is issued, and the defendant is debarred from transfer

Punjab National Bank versus Partha Pratim Manna — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Page No.

¶2

KOLKATA DEBTS REGOVE.RY TRIBUNAL NO. 2 ORDER SHEET

¶3

o.A.t1s2 ot 2022^{(Gontinuation)}

¶4

Puniab National Bank

¶5

¶6

Case No Vs
Partha Pratim anna
Office action with
Date date and dated
of. Order with Signature Signature of
Order parties when
necessary
't0 Counsel for the parties:
20.03.2026 Ms. Paromita Banerjee, Ld. Advocate for the applicant
Bank.
None for the defendant.
0.4.1152 ot 2022 is allowed and disposed of.
Final Order / Judgment is in separate sheet of 6 pages.
File be consigned to record room.
Order be uploaded on the Tribunal,s website.
4?t
CArbindfttadhav)
Presiding Ofiicer
' DRT-2, Kolkata

¶7

¶8

O.A.1152 of 2022 - DRT-2lKot

¶9

DEBTS REGOVERY TRIBUNAL . 2, KOLKATA Jeevan sudha Brdg. 07or Fbor,42tc, J.L. Nehru Road, Korkata - 7oooz1

sh A d Mad P idi

.A o.152 of2 22

ln the matter of

Punjab Nationar Bank, a body corporate dury constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and rransfer of Undertaking)Act, 1970, having its Head office at prot No.4, sector - 10, Dwarka, New Derhi - 11oo7s, and carrying on business, intenaria,from its Brach office amongst others at ramruk Branch, at ramruk, p.o.- Tamruk, Dist.- purba Medinipur, Pin - 721636, West Bengal.

¶14

Applicant Bank

¶15

-Versus-

¶16

1 Partha Pratim Manna (regar heir), son of Late Dirip Kr. Manna, Bahichad, Near Green Valley Hotel, Tamluk, Dist._ purba Medinipur, pin _721651.

¶17

.....j:........ Defendant

¶18

Counsel for parties: For the Applicant Bank : Ms.'llsta Chatterjee & Ms. paromita Banerjee For the Defendant : Ex-Pade

¶19

FrNAI_ ORDER JUDGMENT Delivered on 20.03.2026'

¶20

Applicant, Punjab Nationar Bank instituted the present Apprication being the Original Application No.152 ot 2022 on 04.07.2022 against sole Defendant under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, '1993 (amended from time to time) for recovery of Rs.53,€,173.95 (Rupees fifty three lacs forty three thousand one hundred seventy three and paise eighty five) inclusive of interest charged upto 2o.01.2022 with further interest chargeable as per Bak's prime Lending Rate (BpLR) on and from 21.01.2022 till the date of realization in full with costs and charges. 2. The brief facts of the case as set out by the Applicant Bank in its original Application, as under:

¶21

(i) That Dilip Kr. Manna, since deceased (father of the defendant herein) had applied ' for erstwhile Bank United rrade credit facility for the purpose of development of his fish feed business vide loan application dated 09.07.2012. copy of loan application dated 09.07.2012 is annexed and marked as Annexure 'A'. Upon consideration of loan application, Applicant Bank was pleased to grant / sanction a cash credit facility to the limit of Rs.22,00,000/- (Rupees twenty two lacs) in favour of Dilip Kumar Manna (since

¶22

¶23

¶24

O.A.|1S2 ot 2022 _ DRT-ZKo|

¶25

deceased) vide retter of sanction dated 11.02.201, subsequenfly entranced the same to Rs'43'00 lacs (Rupees forty three lacs) vide letter of sanction dated 01.09.2017 on certain terms and conditions mentioned therein. copy of Letter of sanction datd 11.07.2012 along with acknowredgement and further enhancement vide sanction reuer dated 01.09.2011 are annexed and marked with Annexure ,8,.

¶26

(iii) ln consideration of the aforesaid credit facirities, Dirip Kumar Manna (since deceased) executed and derivered the foflowing roan / security documents in favour of applicant Bank:

¶27

(a) Letter of continuig of entire credit facility dated 01.09.2017;

¶28

(b) Demand promissory Note dated 1 1.01.2012 and 01.0g.2017 ;

¶29

¶30

copy of said documents are annexed and corectivery marked with annexure ,c,. (iv) ln consideration of the said sanction and in acknowredgement of the grant thereof, Dilip Kumar Manna (since deceased) had signed and executed the Agreement of Hypothecation of Goods & Book-Debts, Agreement of hypo. of prant & machinery and Agreement of trade credit dated 11.07 .2012; copies of said documents are annexed and collectively marked as Annexure^,D, &^,E,.

¶31

(v) To secure the said credit facirities, Dirip Kumar Manna (since deceased) created equitable mortgage in respect of his immovabre property through Letter dated u'.os.zi1i, ' morefuily described in schedure at page 16 and para 34 at page g & g of the o.A., by depositing originar rifle Deeds being No.r-0s929 or 2011and Deed No. r_05644 oI 2011, registered in the office A.D.S.R. Tamluk, purba Medinipur. standing i-n the name of Dirip Kr. Manna; consisting of rand & buirding vide sare Deed No.47o2 of 2009 dated 22.09.2009, sare Deed No.5929 of 2011 dated 23.11 .201 1, sare Deed No.s930 ot 2011 dated 23.11.20'l 1, standing in the name of Mr. Dilip Kumar Manna. copies of letter dated . 01 .09.2017 and rifle Deeds being No. 04702 of 2009, s929 ot 2011,05930 of 201 1 with English translation copy of Bengali Deeds and valuation report of the property(s) are annexed and collectively marked as Annexure^.F,.

¶32

¶33

The defendant, Dilip Kumar Manna (since deceased) availed and enjoyed the said . credit facilities by opening Account in Bank's Tamluk Branch, Dist.- purba Madinipur, pin -^{721636.However,the defendant} did not comply with the agreed terms and conditions of said facility. The defendant did not repay the outstanding Bank,s_dues and overdue interest of loan accounts. Despite several requests made by applicant Bank, the defendant did not pay any attention to regularize the Accounts; consequenfly the account(s) became inegular and was classified as NPA on 29.07.2021 . Since the defendant / borrower failed and neglected to liquidate the outstanding dues inspite of repeated requests and reminders, applicant Bank compelled to serve recall / demand Notice dated 22.10.2021 upon sri Partha Pratim Manna (the defendant herein), requesting him to pay the outstanding loan amount, but the defendant did not comply the said Notice, copy of said . demand notice dated 22.10.2021 is annexed and marked as Annexure 'G'. Thereafrer,

¶34

¶35

O.AJ152 ot 2022 _ DRT-ZrKot

¶36

applicant Bank issued Notice dated 2,1.02.2022 upon sri partha pratim Manna (the defendant herein), through its paneiled Advocate demanding to repay the outstanding roan amount within 15 days, but the defendant faired and negrected to pay the dues; copy of said Notices dated 21.01.2022 and 21.02.2022 are annexed and coilectivery marked as Annexure 'H'. certified copies of statement of Account(s) along with certificate under Bankers' Books of Evidence Act, with interest carcuration sheet, AnnExure ,1,, have been filed to show and prove the dues, and further interest chargeabre asper Bank,s prime Lending Rate (BpLR) on and from 21 .01.2022, til the date of rearization in fuil, has been prayed' Applicant Bank has submitted that their claim in the originalApplication is within limitation.

¶37

4' The Notice / summons was sent to the sri partha pratim Manna (the defendant herein), by the Tribunal. lt is observed from the Afiidavit of service dald 21.os.2024 and its enclosures that service of summon upon the Defendant is successfufly effected by . postal service, such has been recorded vide Ld. Registrar,s order dated 22.os.2024. Despite service, the defendant did not appear nor fired the written statement; thus, the defendant was ordered to be proceeded ex-pafte vide order dared 21.0g.2024. Ld. Advocate of the appricant Bank has fired the wriften notes of argument on dated 09'07'2025 thereeby stated that the brief facts of the case as has been nanated in the original application. Ld. Advocate of the applicant Bank has submitted argument on 20.02.2026.

¶38

Applicant Bank has fired the evidence-on-affidavit affirmed by sri Bipin Ram, Branch Manager of Bank's Tamruk Branch, p.o.- Tamruk, Dist.- purba Medinipur arong with the copies of original documents executed by Dilip Kr. Manna, since deceased (father of the defendant herein). original documents have been produc€d by applicant Bank; the same have been verified with copies of the documents annexed with O.A. and after verification the original documents have been returned to sri Dnyandeep prakash Barsagade, Dy. Manager of Bank's Tamluk Branch, Dist.- purba Madinipur on 20.11.2i23,such has been recorded in Ld. Registra/s orderdated 20.11.2023. The documents produced by appticant Bank are exhibited and annexed at^,A' to^,K,.

¶39

I have heard the Ld. Advocate of the applicant Bank and perused the records. 6. Evidence-on-affidavit, filed by applicant Bank, has remained unchallenged, unrebutted and its veracity cannot be put to dispute. Applicant Bank has corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Applicant Bank has proved the sanction of cash credit facility of Rs.22.00 lakhs vide letterof sanction dated 11.07.2012and subsequenflyenhanced the . same to Rs.43.00 lakhs vide lefter of sanction dated 01.09.2017. Applicant Bank has proved the creation of equitable mortgage in respect of immovable property(s); described in Schedule at page^'16 and para 3,A at page 8 & g of the original application.

¶40

¶41

¶42

O.A.t152 ol2022 - DRT-AKot

¶43

on the point of rimitation, Loan has been sanctione d on 11.0r .2012 & 01.09.2017; documents have been executed on 11.07.2012 and 01 .09.201r; originar Apprication has been filed on M.02.2022. Upon perusar on statement of Account it is observed that the defendant has made payment to the appricant Bank for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs'1'50,000/- (by Cash) on 05.03.2020 & 16.o4.2021confirming the outstanding balance in Account(s) As such, the original Application appears to have been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶44

¶45

8' Applicant Bank stated that the outstanding balance in Loan Accounts (inclusive of accrued interest and other charges as carcurated upro 20.01.2022) for anaggregate sum of Rs.53,43,173.8s (Rupees frfty three racs forty three thousand one hundred seventy three and paise eighty five) as on 20.01.2022, which is the amount craimed by appricant Bank in the originalApplication, and the sole defendant is liable to repay the said amount to the applicant Bank with pendente /lfe and future interest, till realization of entire dues. I arrow the craim as made by the appricant Bank in the originarApprication. Appricant Bank has prayed further interest chargeabre as per Bank,s prime Lending Rate (BpLR) on and from 21.01 .2022 thereon tifl the date of rearization in fuil with costs and charges, whire in the.Demand^promissory Note dated 11.07.2012the rate of interest @ 14.g50/oper annum, has been mentioned. Therefore, in my view, the pendente/ife & future rate of interest @ 13.500/o per annum, with quarterry rests, from 21.01.2022, is aflowed.

¶46

since Dirip Kumar Manna (father of the defendant herein) is the principar borrower and mortgagor has expired, and appricant Bank has fired the originar apprication against Sri Partha Pratim Manna (son of Late Dirip Kumar Manna); hence, the riabirity of regar heir of Late Dilip Kumar Manna is onry to the extent of the property(s) inherited by him from Dilip Kumar Manna (since deceased), the principal borrower and mortgagor. Though it is , fact that the defendant, sri partha pratim Manna is not personafly responsibre for the roan availed by Dilip Kumar Manna (since deceased), but the estate of Late Dilip Kumar Manna which will devorve upon the defendant, sri padha pratim Manna wilr be riabre for the roan of Dilip Kumar Manna (since deceased). The riabirity of the Defendant, Sri partha pratim Manna (legal heir) is restricted to the extent of assets inherited by him from Dirip Kumar Manna (since deceased), the principal borrower and mortgagor. 10' The matter also fulls within the tenitorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Applicant Bank has proved to claim made in the o.A. Hence, the original application being O.A./152 ot2922deserves to be allowed; hence allowed.

¶47

ln view of the above, I pass the following order :_

¶48

¶49

O.A.t152 ot 2022 - DRT-Ut<ot

¶50

ORDE R

¶51

(i) o.A. No.152 0t 2022, fired by appricant Bank, is ailowed and debt is determined with cost against the Defendant. rt is hereby ordered that the Defendant is hereby directed to pay the totar debt amount of Rs.53,43,173.g5 (Rupees fifty three racs forty three thousand one hundred seventy three and paise eighty five) due and payabre, incrusive of interest and other charges as carcurated upto 20.01.2022; and interest for the period pen dente rite and future rate @ 13.50% per annum, with quarterly rests, from 21.01.2022,ti11 realization of the entire sum due and recoverable.

¶52

(ii) Amount, if any, paid by the Defendant in the roan account or amount, if any, recovered by the appricant Bank after firing of the original Apprication, the same may be taken into account whire arriving at the exact amount of duevdebt payabre by the Defendant. Accordingry, the pendente rite and future interest shafl be carcurated on the reduced amount.

¶53

(iii) The defendant is debarred from transferring, arienating, encumbering or disposing of the mortgaged immovabre property, described in schedure at page 16 and para 3A at page 8 & 9 of the original application, as under _

¶54

M rtoa ed lmm ovab P (s):

¶55

"All That^piece and Oarc2t gt irym9vab* prcpefties p19r:sfrrine of tand and buitding situated at Mouza - Bahichad, i.s.-- i[iu*, Dist.- piha Medinipur, J.L. No. 1 36(LR) Khatian No. 40 1 and'831 ina i{i'. xiriii' ui.iiiil i,'"iil i! sqz .na 406, Ptot No.1716 (RS)_?l! (R), totat ireaieasuing 23.80 decimat bastu, vide , sate deed No.4702 ot.?g^g-q*d ZZ.Oe.iOOg, sale deed No.Sg2s of 2011 dated Mr. Dilip 23.11-2011, Kumar sate Manna.rr deed No.se3l ot 2011 ----- -diiii'zs.r r .zoii , ;i;;;;;i; th-r' name or

¶56

The liabirity of the Defendant, sri partha pratim Manna (regar heir) is restricted to . the extent of assets inherited by him from Dirip Kumar Manna (since deceased), the principal borrower and mortgagor.

¶57

The Defendant is arso debarred from transferring, arienating, encumbering or disposing any other property(s) either movable or immovable and assets belonging to him till the aforesaid adjudicated debt amount are recovered from the Defendant.

¶58

(iv) The defendant is given a time of sixty days from the date of this Finar order / Judgment for repayment of the above mentioned dues, so intimated to him. rn case the . Defendant fails to pay the dues within the above mentioned time, the appricant Bank is entitled to recover its dues by sare of secured property(s), both moveabre and immoveabre as aforesaid, in accordance with law.

¶59

(v) Let the certificate of Recovery be drawn up by Ld. Registrar forthwith in terms of Final order / Judgment for issuance of the same against the sole Defendant in favour of Applicant Bank under section 19(22) ofthe Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (amended from time to time) and put up the same for signature for issuance.

¶60

¶61

¶62

O.A.h52 of 2022 - DR-r-2Kot

¶63

(vi) Ld. Recovery officer sharr rearize the amount as per the Recovery certificate from the Defendant, in accordance with law.

¶64

(vii) Ld. Registrar of this Tribunar is directed to prace Recovery certificate in terms of this Final Order / Judgment under sectio n 19(22) of the Act of 1993. Accordingry, the original Apprication, being o.A. No.i52 of 2o2zis artowed and stands disposed of.

¶65

This order is dictated and corrected by the undersigned and pronounced on this the 20th day of March, 2026.

¶66

copy of the Finar order / Judgment be uproaded in the Tribunals website.

¶67

A.+r,(^rYo r' (Arbind Presiding Offrcer DRT-2, Kotkata

¶68

Punjab National Bank v. Partha Pratim Manna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Partha Pratim Manna

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S S.A. Sarkar Motors

Canara Bank versus Sri Piyush Garg

Canara Bank versus Smt Karishma Garg

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Armina Traders

Axis Bank versus Rintu Mollick

Punjab National Bank versus Sri Ajay Kumar Patra