Allowed

Uco Bank v. Sri Buddhadeb Laha

DRT24 Apr 2026OA/331/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application filed by UCO Bank for recovery of a bank loan amounting to Rs. 42,20,351.81. The women were ordered to pay the principal amount with interest at 8% per annum. The property was frozen and a recovery certificate was directed.

What did the court decide?

The respondents were directed to jointly and severally pay the total debt of Rs. 42,20,351.81 plus interest at 8% per annum with quarterly rests from 11.08.2023.

Uco Bank versus Sri Buddhadeb Laha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Page No

¶2

KOLKATA DEBTS REGOVERY TRIBUNAL NO. 2 ORDER SHEET

¶3

O.A.1331 ot 2OZ3^{(Gontinuation)}

¶4

UCO Bank

¶5

Gase No. Vs
Sri Buddhadeb Laha & Anr.
Office action with
Date date and dated
of Order with Signature Signature of
Order parties when
necessary
09 Counsel for the parties:
24.U.2
Sri O.P. Chowdhury Ld. Advocate representing Mr. Rathi
Dey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant Bank.
None for the defendants.
O.A./331 of 2023 is allowed and disposed of.
Final Order / Judgment is in separate sheet of S pages.
File be consigned to record room.
Order be uploaded on the Tribunat,s website.
( n Madhav)
Presidi ng Ofiicer
DRT-2, Kotkata

¶6

¶7

O.A./331 of 2023 - DRT-2/Kol

¶8

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 2, KOLKATA Jeevan Sudha Bldg. 07th Floor,42lC, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata -700071

¶9

Before Shri Arbind Madhav , Presidinq Officer

¶10

O.A. No. 331 of 2023

¶11

ln the matter of

¶12

UGO Bank, a body corporate duly constituted under the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking)Act, 1970, having its Head Office at 10, B.T.M. Sarani, Brabourn Road, PS.- Hare Sheet, Kolkata - 700001, having Zonal Ofiice at First Floor, Einstein Avenue, B-Zone, Durgapur, Pin -713205, and carrying on business, rnfera/ra, through one of its Branch Office at Ausgram, PO. & PS.- Ausgram, Dist.-^purba Burdwan, Pin -713152, known as 'Ausgram Branch'.

¶13

Applicant Bank

¶14

¶15

1 Sri Buddhadeb Laha, proprietor of M/s Amita Apan, son of Late Anadi Laha, Village & P.O.- Bannabagram, P.S.- Ausgram, Dist.- Purba Burdwan, Pin -713152.

¶16

3 Smt. Jayanti Laha, wife of Sri Buddhadeb Laha, Village & P.O.- Bannabagram, P.S.- Ausgram, Dist.- Purba Burdwan, Pin -713152.

¶17

Defendants

¶18

Counsel for parties: For the Applicant Bank : Mr. Rathin Dey For the Defendants : Ex-parte.

¶19

FINAL ORDER / JUDGMENT Delivered on24 04.2026

¶20

Applicant, UCO Bank tendered the present Application being the Original Application No.331 of 2023 on10.11.2O23 againsttwoDefendantsunderSection 19(1)of theRecovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (amended from time to time) for recovery of Rs.42,20,351.81 (Rupees forty two lakh twenty thousand three hundred fifty one and paise eighty one) including interest as on 10.08.2023 and further interest upto date at the prescribed rate with monthly rests, till realization. 2. The brief facts of the case as set out by the Applicant Bank in its Original Application, as under:

¶21

(i) The defendant No.1 is the proprietor of the proprietorship firm, namely 'M/s Amrita Apan' availed cash credit loan facilities approached to the applicant Bank vide loan application. Upon consideration of loan application, applicant bank was pleased to grant / sanction a cash credit facility to the limit of Rs.8.00 lakh (Rupees eight lakh) on dated 27.O7.2005. The limit was enhanced from Rs.8.00 lakh to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh) on 16.04.2010. Again, the limit was enhanced from Rs.10.00 lakh to Rs.12.50 lakh on

¶22

¶23

¶24

O.A./331 of 2023 - DRT-2/Ko|

¶25

08.10.2012. Further, the cash credit limit was enhanced from Rs.12.50 lakh to Rs.17.00 lakh on 11.08.2014. Again, on26.02.2016 itwas enhanced from Rs.17.00 lakh to Rs.19.00 lakh. Again,thesaidlimitwasenhancedfromRs.lg.00 lakhtoRs.30.00 lakh(Rupeesthirty lakh) on 07.02.2018. The loan account was classified as NpA on 2S.OS.2O21.

¶26

The defendants No.1 & 2 availed home loan for an amount of Rs.g.00 lakh on 25.06.2018, and the said loan account became NpA on 29.0s.2023. The defendant No.1 took two GECL facilities, one was sanctioned on 26.11.2021 for limit of Rs.2.g1 lakh and another was sanctioned on '13.07.2020 for limit of Rs.5.63 lakh. Both the loan accounts were classified as NPA on 25.05.2023.

¶27

(ii) ln consideration of loan apptication dated 01.12.2011 , 1z .06.2020 and 1s.07 .2021 applicant Bank agreed to sanction the said credit facilities in favour of defendants vide sanction letters dated 07.02.2018,25.06.2018 & 13.07.2020. copy of loan application and sanction letters are duly annexed and collectively marked as Annexure^,A. ln acknowledgement of granting the aforesaid credit facilities, the defendant No.1 executed the following loan / security documents in favour of applicant Bank;

¶28

(a) Demand Promissory Notes dated 30.01.2018 for Rs.30,00,000/-, dated 27.06.2018 for Rs.8,00,000/-, dated 14.07.2020 for Rs.5,63,000/- and dated 26.11 .2021 for Rs.2,81,000/-;

¶29

(b) Hypothecation of Goods to secure demand cash credit dated 30.01.2019 executed by defendant No.1;

¶30

¶31

(d) One Loan Agreement executed on dated 27.06.2018;

¶32

(e) The defendant No.2 executed a personal guarantee agreement on dated 30.01.2018 against the above-said loan.

¶33

Copies of said documents are duly annexed and marked as Annexure^,B' to^,F, respectively.

¶34

(iii) To secure the aforesaid credit facilities, the defendant No.1 duly created equitable mortgage in respect of his immovable property, morefully described in Schedule Annexure 'M' & 'N' at page 223 lo 225 and para 3A at page 6 & 7 of the original application, by depositing original Title Deed(s) with the applicant Bank. Copies of mortgage confirming letter dated 15-12.2017,letter from mortgagor / defendant No.1 dated O1.12.2017 tor depositing of title deed, undertaking furnished by mortgagor / defendant No.1 dated 01.12.2017, Lefter from the mortgagor for covering increase in limits dated 01.12.2017 and letter from the mortgagor / defendant No.1 for increase in limits dated 01.12.2017 are annexed and collectively marked as Annexure^'G-1'. The defendant No.1 furnished a letter dated 29.01 .2018 with a request for extension of equitable mortgage, copy of said letter and copy of title deed mortgaged are annexed and marked as Annexure^'G-2'. Applicant Bank made a valuation of the mortgaged property by its empanelled valuer, copy of said valuation is annexed and marked as Annexure^'H'.

¶35

¶36

o .A.r331 ot 2023 - oRr-uKor

¶37

(iv) The defendant No.1 has confirmed the correctness of his loan Accounts by executing DebtAcknowledgement Letters for all accounts separately on dated 31.12.2022 in favour of applicant Bank; copies of said four balance confirmation / debt acknowledgement are annexed and marked asAnnexure'l'.

¶38

(v) The defendant No.1 made a request to the applicant Bank for renewal of his existing cash credit account(s) by letter dated 03.01.2022; copy of which is annexed and marked as Annexure 'J'.

¶39

The defendants availed and enjoyed the aforesaid credit facilities by opening Accounts in Defendant No.1's firm's name (M/s Amrita Apan) in Bank,s Ausgram Branch, P.o. & P.s.- Ausgram, Dist.- Purba Burdwan. However, the defendants did not comply with the agreed terms and conditions of said facilities. The defendants did not repay the outstanding Bank's dues and agreed EMls and overdue interest of loan accounts. Despite several requests made by applicant Bank, the defendants did not pay any attention to regularize the Accounts; consequently, the accounts became irregular and was classified as NPA on 25.05.2023 and 29.05.2023. Since the defendants / borrowe(s) failed to liquidate the dues with the applicant Bank, the applicant Bank compelled to issue demand notice dated 11.08.2023 upon the defendants through its Advocate demanding the outstanding loan amounts, but the defendants failed and neglected to repay the same, copy of said notice dated 11.08.2023 is annexed and marked asAnnexure 'L. certified copies of Statement of Accounts along with Certificate under Bankers' Books of Evidence Act, w1h interest calculation sheet (Annexure 'K-1', 'K-2' ,'K-3' & 'K4'), have been filed to show and prove the dues, and further interest upto date and interest pen denti tite with monthly rests, till realization, has been prayed. Applicant Bank submitted that their claim in the original Application is within limitation.

¶40

The Notices / summons were sent to Defendants No.1 & 2 by the Tribunal. lt is seen from the s/R on afiidavit dated 02.06.2025 that service of Notices / summons upon the Defendants is successfully effected, such has been recorded vide Ld. Registrar's order dated 01.09.2025. Despite service, the defendants did not appear nor filed the written statement; hence, both the defendants were ordered to be proceeded ex-patte vide order dated 05.02.2026. Ld. Advocate of the applicant Bank has filed the English translation copy of Bengali Deed(s) by way of an Afiidavit on dated 07.12.2023. Ld. Advocate of the applicant bank has submitted argument on20.03.2026.

¶41

Applicant Bank has filed evidence-on-Afiidavit, affirmed by Sri Sanjay Kumar, Senior Manager of Bank's Ausgram Branch, PO. & P.S.- Ausgram, Dist.- Purba Burdwan along with copy of original documents executed by the defendants. Original documents have been produced by applicant Bank; the same have been verified with copies of the documents annexed with the O.A. and after verification the originals have been returned to Sri S. Kumar, Asstt, Manager of Bank'sAusgram Branch, PO. & PS.-Ausgram, Dist.- Purba Burdwan on 19.12.2024, such has been recorded vide Ld. Asstt. Registrar's order dated

¶42

¶43

¶44

o.A./33,r of 2023 - DRT-2/Kor

¶45

19.12.2024. The documents produced by applicant Bank are exhibited and marked as Exhibits'AW-1' to'AW-9'.

¶46

I have heard the Ld. Advocate ofthe 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 proved the averments made in the original Application. Applicant Bank has proved the sanction of credit facilities to the limit of Rs.30.00 lakh on 30.01.2018, Rs.8.00 takh on dated 27.06.2018, Rs.5,63,000/- on dated 14.07.2020 and Rs.2,81,000/- on dated 26.1,1.2021. Applicant Bank has proved the creation of equitable mortgage in respect of immovable property(s); morefully described in scheduleAnnexure'M'&'N' alpage223lo22s and para 3Aat page 6 & 7 of the original application.

¶47

on the point of limitation, the loan has been sanctioned on 30.01 .2019 , 27 .06.201g, 14.07 2020 & 26.11 .2021; documents have been executed on 30.01.2018 , 27 .06.2018, 14.07.2020 &26.11.2021, and originat Application has been fited on 10.11.2023. As such, the originalApplication appears to have been filed well within the period of limitation. 8. Applicant Bank stated that the outstanding balance in Loan Accounts (inclusive of accrued interest & other charges as calculated upto 10.08.2023) for an aggregate sum of Rs'42,20'351.81 (Rupees forty two lakh twenty thousand three hundred fifty one and paise eighty one) as on 10.08.2023, which is the amount claimed by applicant Bank in the original Application, and the defendants No.1 & 2 are, jointly and/or severally, liable to repay the said amount to the applicant Bank with pendente lite and future interest, till realization. I allow the claim as made by applicant Bank in the original Application. Applicant Bank has prayed further interest upto date and interest pe ndenti lite with monthly rests, till realization, while in Demand Promissory Notes dated 30.01 .20'18 & 26.11 .2021 the rate of interest @ 8.45yo, @ 7 .50o/o per annum with monthly rests, have been mentioned. Therefore, in my view, the pende nte lite & future rate of interest @ 8% per annum, with quarterly rests, from 11 .08.2023, till full and final realization of the entire debt, is allowed.

¶48

The matter also falls within the territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Applicant Bank has proved its claim made in the O.A. The original application being O.A./331 of 2023 deserves to be allowed; hence allowed.

¶49

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

¶50

ORDER

¶51

(i) O.A. No.331 of 2023, filed by applicant Bank, is allowed and debt is determined with cost against the Defendants No.1 & 2. lt is hereby ordered that the Defendants No.1 & 2 are hereby directed to pay,^jointly and/or severally, the total debt amount of Rs .42,20,351.81 (Rupees forty two lakh twenty thousand three hundred fifty one and paise eighty one) due and payable, inclusive of interest and other charges calculated upto 10.08.2023; and interest for the period pendente lite and future @ 8% per annum, with quarterly rests, ftom 11.08.2023, till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable.

¶52

¶53

O.A./331 of 2023 - DRT-ZKo|

¶54

(ii) Amount, if any, paid by the defendants in the loan accounts or amount, if any, recovered by applicant Bank after filing of the original Application, the same may be taken into account while arriving at the exact amount of dues/debt payable by the Defendants No.1 & 2. Accordingly, the pendente lite and future interest shall be calculated on the reduced amount.

¶55

(iii) Defendants No.1 & 2 are debarred from transferring, alienating, encumbering or disposing of the mortgaged immovable property(s), described in schedule Annexure'M' & 'N' at page 2231o 225 and para 3A at page 6 & 7 of the original application, as under:

¶56

Mortqaqed lmmovable Properfu (s):

¶57

"All the piece and parcel of the landed prcperty measuing about 4 decimals & with a G+1 stoied building situated at L.R. Dag /^ptot No.1920(p), L.R. Khatian No.17g3 & 779, J.L. No.28, Touzi No.12, Village, Mouza &^p.O.- Bannabagram, under Ausgram Panchayet, P.S.- Ausgram, Distict - Puha Burdwan, pin - 7131 52. Equitably mortgaged by the defendant No.1 by deposition of oiginaltiile deed vide Deed No. l-0068 for the year 2002, registered before ADSR-Guskara, Burdwan and recorded in book No.-l, volume No.03, page No.16 - 19.,,

¶58

The Defendants are also debarred from transferring, alienating, encumbering or disposing any other property(s) and assets belonging to them till the aforesaid adjudicated debt amount are recovered from the Defendants No.'l & 2.

¶59

(iv) Defendants No.1 & 2 are given a time of sixty days from the date of this Final Order / Judgment for repayment of the above mentioned dues, so intimated to them. ln case the Defendants fail to pay the dues within the above mentioned time, the applicant Bank is entitled to recover its dues by sale of secured property(s), as aforesaid. Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against personal property(s) of the defendants both moveable and immoveable and also proceed against the Defendants No.'l & 2 personally to recover the dues, in accordance with law.

¶60

(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 Defendants No.1 & 2 in favour of applicant Bank under Section 1 9(22) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (amended from time to time) and put up the same for signature for issuance.

¶61

(vi) Ld. Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the Recovery Certificate from Defendants No.1 & 2, in accordance with law.

¶62

(vii) Ld. Registrar of this Tribunal is directed to place Recovery Certificate in terms of this Final Order / Judgment under section 19(22) of the Act of 1993.

¶63

Accordingly, the Original Application, being O.A. No.33'l of 2023 is allowed and stands disposed of. File be consigned to Record room.

¶64

This order is dictated and corrected by the undersigned and pronounced on this the 24th day of April, 2026.

¶65

Copy of the Final Order / Judgment be uploaded on the Tribu al's Web

¶66

J lrz ,4 2\ (Arbind Madhav) Presiding Ofiicer DRT-2, Kolkata

¶67

Uco Bank v. Sri Buddhadeb Laha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Sri Buddhadeb Laha

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 Sekh Halim

State Bank of India versus Sri Biplab Mondal

Canara Bank versus Sri Hari Bandhu Jana

Canara Bank versus Sri Abhijit Ghosh

Uco Bank versus Chiranjib Roy

Yes Bank Limited versus Munee Devi