CANARA BANK vs M/s Shakti Enterprises on 18 February 2019

FINAL ORDER

(18.02.2019)

1. The applicant bank has filed the OA bearing No.252/2014 on 31.03.2014 before the Ld. DRT- III, Delhi which stands transferred to this Tribunal vide order dated 09.07.2015 passed by the Ld. Registrar, DRT- III, Delhi. The OA has been filed for recovery of Rs.11,10,721.12 (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Ten Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty One and Paise Twelve only) along with pendentelite and future interest @15.70% p.a. at monthly rest from the date of OA till its realization.

2. Brief facts of the OA are that the present OA is filed by Shri Prem Chand, Senior Manager of the applicant bank who is fully conversant with the facts of the case and is competent to sign, verify and institute the present OA.

3. The Defendant No.1 is a Proprietorship concern running its business of manufacturing of readymade garments. Defendant No.2 while working under the name and style of M/s Shakti Enterprises, as its sole proprietor had approached the applicant bank with the request for sanction of credit/over draft facility to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs only) vide application dated 31.12.2009 which was sanctioned by the bank. The deendant No.2 had executed the Request for Overdraft Facilities dated 31.12.2009; Pronote, Letter of Undertaking, Loans/Advances, Cash Credit Agreement dated 31.12.2009 etc.

4. It is further stated that Further it was also agreed that in case the account became irregular then the penal interest @2.00% p.a. over and above normal rate of interest was also to be charged on the account.

5. It is further submitted that Defendant no.2 had again approached the Applicant Bank with the request for enhancement of the said sanctioned credit/overdraft limit from Rs.7,00,000/- to Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees Ten Lakhs only). The said request was considered by the applicant bank enhanced the loan to Rs.10 lakhs on 09.06.2011. In consideration of sanction the said loan, the Defendant No.2 as the sole proprietor had signed, executed and delivered the following documents on 09.06.2011 including Supplementary Agreement ; Link Letter in respect of Enhancement of Credit Facilities duly signed and executed by Defendant No.2; Pronote; Acknowledgement of Debt and Security etc. The said OD limit was repayable with minimum interest @ 2.50% p.a. above ongoing Prime

Lending Rate or at such other rates as may be revised by the Bank from time to time as per directives of RBI with a minimum of 12.50% p.a. compounded with monthly rests till the date of payment in full and other usual charges. Further it was also agreed that in case the account became irregular then the penal interest @2.00% p.a. over and above normal rate of interest was also to be charged on the account.

6. It is further submitted that the aforesaid overdraft facility was again renewed on the same terms & conditions against the security of documents signed and executed by Defendant No.2 in accordance with the requirements of the Applicant on 07.09.2012 including Acknowledgement of Debt and Security and Letter of Renewal dated 07.09.2012.’

7. However, the defendants have availed the said loan/limit but failed to comply & neglected to clear the outstanding dues thus, the account was declared as NPA on 28.12.2013. Thereafter, the applicant bank sent the legal notice dated 26.02.2014 calling upon the Defendants to make the payment of Rs.11,00,721.12 alonwith interest but they failed to pay the dues. Thus, the applicant bank has filed the present OA.

8. Notice was issued. Defendants put in appearance through their counsel and filed the written statement however, thereafter, the defendants failed to file the evidence. Record reveals that after February, 2018 none is appearing for defendants thus, they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 23.10.2018.

9. The applicant bank filed their evidence by affidavit of Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank and proved all the loaning and security documents as Exb. PW-1/1 to Exb. PW1/15.

10. I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank and perused the record.

11. The Applicant Bank has claimed interest @15.70% p.a. at monthly rest from the date of OA till its realization, the same is allowed in terms of order dated 23.01.2019 of the Hon’ble DRAT, Delhi in Appeal No.368/2018 titled as ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. M/s Duncan Mecneill Power India Limited & Ors.

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

ORDER

(i) I allow this OA and direct the defendant No.1 & 2 to pay to the applicant FI, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.11,10,721.12 (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Ten Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty One and Paise Twelve only) along with pendentelite and future interest @15.70% p.a. at monthly rest from the date of OA till its realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from personal moveable and immoveable assets of the defendant. The cost of litigation be also borne by the defendant. The applicant bank is also directed to file the revised statement of account before the Ld. Recovery Officer of this Tribunal.

(ii) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, DRT-I Delhi.

(iii) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT-I Delhi on 25.03.2019.

(iv) Copy of this Judgment and recovery certificate be sent to all the parties free of cost by registered post.

(v) File be consigned to record room.

(Dr. REKHA G. DHAKAR) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-I, DELHI ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT February 18,2019