Allowed

Uco Bank v. Chiranjib Roy

DRT24 Apr 2026OA/430/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application by UCO Bank for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 29.39 million. The bank proved sanction letters, security documents, and notices served under the SARFAESI Act. Being absconding, the defendants argued nothing. The debt was determined, and a recovery certificate was directed to be issued.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are directed to pay Rs. 29,39,068.00 inclusive of interest and charges, and interest at 9.50% per annum from 05.05.2024. A recovery certificate under Section 19(22) shall be issued.

Uco Bank versus Chiranjib Roy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Page No.

¶2

KOTKATA DEBTS REGOVERY TRIBUNAI NO. 2 ORDER SHEET

(Gonti nuation)

UCO Bank

O.A.r430 ot 2024

Case No Vs
Chiranjib Roy & Ors.
Office action with
Date date and dated
of Order with Signature Signature of
Order parties when
necessary
Counsel for the parties:
11
24.04.202 ) Ms. Aysha Khatoon, Ld. Advocate representing Mr Rahhr.
Sarkar, Ld. Counsel for the applicant Bank.
None for the defendants.
O.A./430 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of.
Final Order / Judgment is in separate sheet of 5 pages.
File be consigned to record room.
Order be uploaded on the Tribunal's website.
@'
(Arbind Madhav)
Presiding Ofiicer
DRT-2, Kolkata

¶7

¶8

O.A.|43O of 2024 - DRT-2tKot

¶9

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 2, KOLKATA Jeevan Sudha Bldg. 07ttr Floor,42\C,J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata _7OOOZ1 reS hri Arbi nd Madhav. Pres idinE Officer

¶10

O.A. No.430 ot 2024

¶11

ln the matter of

¶12

uco Bank, a body corporate dury constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and rransfer of undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head office at 10, B.T.M. sarani, Brabourne Road, Korkata - 7oooo1, and carrying on business, inter-aria, at its Bankura Branch, Mil. &^p'o.- Machantara, p.s.- Bankura, District - Bankura, pin -722101.

¶13

Applicant Bank

¶14

-Versus-

¶15

1 chiranjib Roy, son of Late Santisekhar Roy, residing at Moldubka, Bankura, p.s. & District - Bankura, Pin -722101, West Bengal.

¶16

2 Anjana Das Roy, \Mfe of Chiranjib Roy, at Moldubka, Doletala, Bankura, p.S. & District - Bankura, Pin -722101 , West Bengal.

¶17

3 subhrakanti Karmakar, Son of sovan chandra Karmakar, at Moldubka, Bankura, P.S. & District - Bankura, pin -722101, West Bengal.

¶18

Defendants

¶19

Counsel for parties:

¶20

For the Applicant Bank : Mr. Rahul Sarkar

¶21

For the Defendants : Ex-Parte.

¶22

FINAL ORDE R / JUDGMENT Delivered on 24.04.2026

¶23

Applicant, UCo Bank, tendered the present Application being the originar Application No.430 ol 2024 on 19.07.2024 against three Defendants under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, '1993 (amended from time to time) for recovery of Rs.29,39,068.00 (Rupees twenty nine lakh thirty nine thousand sixty eight) inclusive of interest calculated as on o4.05.2024 with further interest upon certificate amount as per base rate per annum with monthly rests, Until realization. 2. The brief facts of the case as set out by applicant Bank in its Original Application, as under:

¶24

(i) The defendant No.1 is the borrower and the defendants No.2 & 3 are the guarantors of the credit facilities. The defendants approached to the applicant Bank for credit accommodation vide application dated 09.11.2017 . Upon consideration of loan application, applicant Bank was^pleased to grant / sanction a cash credit facility to the limit of Rs.13,00,000.00 (Rupees thirteen lakh) which was further enhanced to Rs.15,00,000/(Rupees fifteen lakh), and also sanctioned one Term Loan of Rs.11,70,000/- (Rupees

e :4..:5. _.

O.A.|43O ol 2024 - DRr-ziKot

¶29

eleven lakh seventy thousand) under UCo car Loan Scheme on dated 24.12.2021 and also sanctioned rerm Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one rakh fifty thousand), Term Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one rakh fifty thousand) and rerm Loan of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees four lakh fifty thousand) in favour of the defendants against primary security of hypothecation of stocks and book debts, prant & machinery arong with car and equitabre Mortgage in respect of immovabre property copy of roan apprication dated 09.11.201r and sanction retters dated 10.12.2017 &24.12.2021are annexed and coilectivery marked as Annexure 'A. At the rerevant point of time, the rate of interest was charged @ 11.60% towards cash credit and @7.25o/o towards Term Loan.

¶30

(ii) ln acknowledgement of granting the aforesaid credit facilities granted to the defendants, the defendants executed and delivered the following security documents all dated 20.03.2024 in tavour of applicant Bank:

¶31

(a) Demand^promissory Note (A_1) for Rs.34,20,000/_;

¶32

(b) Letter of Waiver (A47);

¶33

¶34

(d) Composite Deed of Hypothecation;

¶35

(e) Under Certificate of posting.

¶36

copies of said loan documents are annexed and marked asAnnexure ,A-1',,A_2', 'A-3','A4' &'A-5' respectively.

¶37

(iii) To secure the said credit facilities availed by defendants, the defendants created equitable mortgage in respect of immovable property(s), morefuily described in schedure at page 26 and para 3A at page 5 to 7 of the originar apprication, by depositing originar Deed of sale being No.1781 ot2023 and correction Deed No.97 of 2004 with the appticant Bank. The defendants have duly confirmed the Mortgage by executing a Memorandum recording for creation of equitable Mortgage by depositing of registered Deed on dated 16.05.2017. copy of said Deed of sale and correction Deed and the Valuation Report of mortgaged property dated 14.04.2023 and the CERSAI dated 1g.05.2020 are annexed and collectively marked as Annexure^,A-6,. 3. The defendants availed and enjoyed the said credit facility by opening Accounts in Bank's Bankura Branch, vill. & P.o.- Machantala, Dist.- Bankura. However, the defendants did not comply with the agreed terms and conditions of said facility, thus violated the terms and conditions of the sanction of the said loans. The defendants did not repay the outstanding Bank's dues, 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 NPAon 30.03.2024. Since the defendants / borrower(s) failed to liquidate the dues with the applicant Bank inspite ' of repeated requests and reminders, the applicant Bank compelled to issue / serve Notices on dated 08.03.2024 and 02.04.2024 upon the defendants requesting them to repay the outstanding loan amounts, but they failed and neglected by making payment. Thereafter, applicant Bank issued notice U/s 13(2) of the

¶38

¶39

¶40

O.A.|43O ot 2O24 _ DRT-2lKot

¶41

sarfaesi Act, 2002 dared 12.04.2024 upon he defendants cailing upon them to repay the outstanding dues as on date, but the defendants did not compry the said Notice; copy of said notice dated 09.03-2024 a 02.04.2024 and copy ot 13(2) notice dated 12.04.2024 are annexed and collectively marked as Annexure ,A-7,. certified copies of statement of Accounts arong with certificate under Bankers, Books of Evidence Act, with interest calculation sheet, (Annexure 'A-g'), have been fired to show and prove the dues, and future interest and interest upon certificate amount @ under floating option and as per base rate per annum with monthry rests, untir realization, has been prayed. Appricant Bank submitted that their craim in the originarApprication is within rimitation.

¶42

The Notices / summons were sent to Defendants No.1, 2 & 3 by the Tribunar. rt is observed from S/R on affidavit date d 15.05.2025 and its enclosures that service of Notices / summons upon the Defendants is successfur, such has been recorded vide order dated 05 '02'2026- Despite service, the defendants did not appear nor filed the written statement; thus, all the defendants were ordered to be proceed ed ex-parte vide order dated 05.02.2026. Ld. Advocate of the applicant Bank has submitted argument on 20.03.2026. 5. Applicant Bank has fired the evidence-on-Affidavit, affirmed by Jitendra Kumar, sr. Manager of Bank's Bankura Branch, Machantara, Dist.- Bankura, pin -722101along with the copy of original documents executed by the defendants. original documents have been produced by applicant Bank; the same have been verified with copies of documents annexed with the o.A. and after verification the originals have been returned to Ayush Kumar Tiwary, Assft. Manager of Bank's Bankura Branch, Machantala, Dist.- Bankura on 09.09.2025, such has been recorded in Ld. Registrar's order dated 09.09.202s. The documents produced by applicant Bank are exhibited and marked as Exhibits,A and ,A-1, to'A-8'.

¶43

I have heard the Ld. Advocate ofthe applicant Bank and perused the records. 6. Evidence-on-affidavit, filed by applicant Bank, has remained unchallenged, unrebufted 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 Rs.15.00 lakh towards cash credit and rerm Loans of Rs.11.70 lakh, Rs.1.s0 lakh, Rs.1.s0 lakh and Rs.4.50 lakh vide sanction lefters dated 10.11.2017 &24.12.2021. Appticant Bank has proved the creation of equitable mortgaged in respect of immovable property and hypothecated movable assets, morefully described in Schedule at page 26 &27 and para 3A at page 5 to 7 of the original application.

¶44

On the point of limitation, the loan has been sanctioned on 10.11.2O17 & 24.12.2021,|oan / security documents have been executed on 20.03.2024, and original Application has been filed on 19.07.2024. As such, the original Application appears to have been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶45

¶46

¶47

O.A.I43O ol 2024 - ORr-2tKot

¶48

8' Applicant Bank stated that the outstanding balance in Loan Accounts (inclusive of accrued interests and other charges as calculated upto 04.05.2024) for an aggregated sum of Rs.29,39,068.00 (Rupees twenty nine lakh thirty nine thousand sixty eight) as on 04.05.2024, which is the amount claimed by the applicant Bank in the originalApplication, and the defendants No.1, 2 & 3 are, joinfly and/or severally, liable to repay the said amount to the applicant Bank with pen dente lite andfuture interest, till realization. I allow the claim as made by the applicant Bank in the original Apprication. Appricant Bank has prayed interest upon certificate amount @ under floating option and as per base rate per annum with monthly rests, until realization, while in the sanction letters dated 10.11 .2e17 and 24.12.2021 the rate of interest @ 11.6oyo and @7.25o/o per annum respectively with monthly rests, have been mentioned. Therefore, in my view, lhe pendente /ife & future rate of interest @ 9.50% per annum, with quarterly rests, from os.os.2o24, till realization of the entire due in full, is allowed.

¶49

The matter also falls within the territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction of this Tribunal. The applicant Bank has proved its claim made in the o.A. The original application being O.A./430 of 2024 deserves to be allowed; hence allowed. 10. ln view of the above, I pass the following order :-

¶50

ORDER

¶51

(i) o.A. No.430 of 2024, filed by applicant Bank, is allowed and debt is determined with cost against the Defendants No.1 , 2 & 3. lt is hereby ordered that the Defendants No.1 , 2 & 3 are hereby directed to pay, joinfly and / or severally, the total debt amount of Rs.29'39'068.00 (Rupees twenty nine lakh thirty nine thousand sixty eight) due and payable, inclusive of interest and other charges as calculated upto 04.05.2024; and interest for the period pendente lite and future @ g.50% per annum, with quarterly rests, from 05.05.2024, till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable.

¶52

(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(s) while aniving at the exact amount of dues/debt payable by the Defendants No.1,2 & 3. Accordingly,lhe pendente /ife and future interest shall be calculated on the reduced amount.

¶53

(iii) Defendants No.1, 2 & 3 are debarred from transferring, alienating, encumbering or disposing of the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated movable assets, described in Schedule at page 26 & 27 and para 34 at page 5 to 7 of the original application, as under -

¶54

Mortqaoed lmmovable Propertv:

¶55

"All the^{pieceand parcel} of land and building measuring 2.50 decimal, situated at Bankura, Mouza - Bankura, J.L. No.211, L.R. Dag No.6239 and 6240, L.R. Khatian No.2480, Holding No.129/4/15, Name of street - Ghatak Circle No.S under ward No.7 of Bankura Municipality. P.O.- Bankura, P.S.- Bankura, Dist.- Bankura, Registered mortgage Deed No. l-1781 of 2003, Registered Book No.l, Volume No.96, Page from 399 to 406 in the name of propefty Subhrakanti Karmakar, Son of Sobhan Chandra Karmakar, D.S.R. Office Bankura, Dist.- Nadia;

¶56

¶57

¶58

O.A.|43O of 2024 _ ORf_2,Xot

¶59

And Conection Deed No.g7 forthe year 2004, Book No.1, Volume No.3, page 125 to 134 and which is bufted and bounaeil Oy. .. On the Nofth By House of Raghunath Sutradhar On the South , B^V t19u-se of GoLr Sintjha and Netai Singha On the East , Eiy 12 feet wide road^' On the West : Eiy Land of Kanan Karmakar.,,

¶60

othe ted Movable Assets:

¶61

"Hypothecation ofSlocks & Book Debts; Hypothecation of Car along with accessoies.,,

¶62

The Defendants are arso debarred from transferring, arienating, encumbering or disposing any other property(s) and assets belonging to them till the aforesaid adjudicated debt amount are recovered from the Defendants No.1 to 3.

¶63

(iv) Defendants No.1, 2 & 3 are given a time of sixty days from the date of this Finar order / Judgment for repayment of the above mentioned dues, so intimated to them. rn case the Defendants fair to pay the dues within the above mentioned time, the appricant Bank is entitled to recover its dues by sare of secured property(s), as aforesaid. Appricant Bank is also entitled to proceed against personar property(s) of the Defendants No.1 , 2 & 3 both moveable and immoveable and also proceed against the Defendants No.1, 2 & 3 personally to recover the dues, in accordance with law.

¶64

(v) Let the certificate of Recovery be drawn up by Ld. Registrar / Registrar-in-charge forthwith in terms of Final order / Judgment for issuance of the same against the Defendants No.1 , 2 & 3 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.

¶65

(vi) Ld. Recovery officer shall realize the amount as per the Recovery certificate from Defendants No.1, 2 & 3, in accordance with law.

¶66

(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 1 993.

¶67

Accordingly, the original Application, being o.A. No.430 of 2024is allowed and stands disposed of,

¶68

File be consigned to Record room.

¶69

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

¶70

Copy of the Final Order / Judgment be uploaded on the Tribunal's Website.

¶71

/+U" l(,{)t,. (A tn Presiding Officer DRT-2, Kolkata

¶72

Uco Bank v. Chiranjib Roy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Chiranjib Roy

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 Sri Buddhadeb Laha

Yes Bank Limited versus Munee Devi