UNION BANK OF INDIA vs Sh Anil Mittal and Ors on 26 May 2025

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 13.09.2017 through Mr' Kapil Dev' Senior Manager of the applicant bank' under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,19,778l- together with cost' charges and pendentellite and future interest @t2.25o/o from date of filing of this O'A' till the realization in full.

2. The brief facts of the case are that at the request of the defendants, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan Facility of Rs'32 lacs for purchase an EA

TANO. 119412023 Under Construction

Floor, Tower-T-3, measuring super area 1019 Sq' Ft in White House, Situated at Group Housing Plot No' 08' ChorosiaEstate,Sector-Pl1&2'atGreaterNoida' Gautam Budha Nagar, UP' vide sanction letter dated 27.08.20t4. The defendant nos' 1 & 2 executed all necessary loaning documents on 23'09'2014' The aforesaid credit facilities were secured by mortgage of aforesaid Property'

3. It is fufther submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facility' but failed to maintain the financial discipline and failed to repay the dueamounts.Theapplicantbankrequestedthe defendants to regularize the loan account by visits and letters, but there was no response from the defendants. Therefore' the applicant bank served a demand notice dated 10'08'2017 to the defendants' demanding the amount due as on that date' but failed to recover the same' Thus' the present O'Af['A' is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues' Flat APartment no' 3154, 15t'

4. On notice bY this Tribunal' defendantnos. 1&2 failed to Put aPpearance at all' desPite Publication' AccordinglY, defendant nos'l and 2 were Proceeded against exparte on 09'09'2024'The defendant no.3 Put appearance through counsel and filed WS but failed to file evidence. Thereafter' defendant no.3 faited to Put appearance, desPite issuance of default notice' AccordinglY, defendant exparte on 09'09'2024' no.3 was Proceeded against q.). -

TANO. 119412023

5. The applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Mr' Kapil Dev' Senior Manager of the applicant bank as paper no' 20 to paper no' 95'

6. Heard the Ld' Counsel for the applicant bank and perused the records' From perusal of the record' it is clear that at the time of executing loan documents the applicant bank has entered into a Tripartite Agreement with the builder along with the borrower' Para 3 of the Tripartite Agreement is as follows:- 3, That in the event of the bonower and or Buitder/land Owner failing to complete the sale ffannction and rcgistntion thereof as per the agreement between Buitder/land Owner & Borrower, tfie Builder/land Owner underbkes and agrces to tefrtrn all the moneys rcceived by him, in onnection with the amount disburced by the Bank to the Bonower for purcha* of the flat in queilion wiilr interest to the Bank'"

7. As per conditions contained in the Tripaftite Agreement at 23'09'2014 at para no' 3' in case of default by the borrower the amount which has been paid by the borrower to the builder has to be returned to the bank. In the present case the borrower has made default in repayment of the EMIs and therefore' as per conditionagreedbeb,veenthepafties,thebuilderis under obligation to return the entire amount which he has received from the borrower or from the applicant bank in lieu of the payment of the construction of the flat. Moreover, from the perusal of the entire facts it is apparent that the bonower has taken the loan and the e\

TA NO. 1194t2023

loan amount has been paid to the builder for construction of the flat' The applicant bank has not claimed that the builder in violation of the terms and conditions has handed over the flat to the defendant nos.1 and 2. The borrower has not taken any amount in his account and the entire amount has been paid to the builder. In addition to this the borrower has also paid the margin money to the builder and also paid certainEMlsasmentionedbytheapplicantbank.The borrower has not got the possession of the flat' If the borrower is directed to pay the amount which has been actually paid to the builder this will amount double penalty on the borrower' The borrower has received no money and has still paid the margin money and also ceftainEMlstothebankandhasgotinreturnnothing. In such circumstances and as per agred terms and conditions it is only the builder who is liable to pay the defaulted amount to the applicant bank' In the tight of the above discussions' the Original Application deserves to defendant no.3. be allowed against the

ORDER

t) I hereby allow this T'A' of the Applicant Bank and direct the defendant no' 3 to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs'29't9'7781- along with cost, expenses and interest @ 10'25o/o from the date of flling of this O'A' the date of realization' which has become T'A till A--.-

TA NO. 119412023 5

2) In case of failure to deposit the above amount within the stipulated period, the same shall be recovered from the sale of the property bearing Flat Apartment no. 3154, 15h Floor, Tower-T-3, measuring super area 1019 Sq' Ft in White House, Situated at Group Housing Plot No. 08, Chorosia Estate' Sector-Pl 1 & 2, at Greater Noida, Gautam Budha Nagar' UP' In case of short fall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of personal movable and immovable assets of the defendant no. 3

3) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il' Delhi.

4) The registry of this Tribunal is hereby directed to issue free copy of the order and send the same to both the parties.

5) Parties are direct to appear before the Ld' Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhion 28'07'2025' Pending IAs, if anY, stand disPosed of' File be consigned to records' Date :26.05.2025 ( sa\ ,l| (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi This judgement has been signed, dated and pronounced in oPen court. (^)sA o' Date : 26.05.2025 (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi T