STATE BANK OF INDIA vs MD SALIM PARVEZ & ORS on 16 March 2020

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III KOLKATA

PRESENT: -SRI ANIL KUMAR cHATURVEDI.

PRESIDING OFFICER.

T.A. No.152 OF 201S.

DATE OF DELIVERY OF oRDER : 16.03.2020

State Bank of India,

Stressed Assets Recovery Branch,

2/ 1, Russel Street, Kankaria

Centre, Kokata - 70O O7t.

...

Applicant Bank.

_Versus-

1.

Md. Salim Pa rvez,

Proprietor of l4/s. K.B. Store,

Z-3/169, Dr. A. K. Road,

Kolkata - 70O 044.

AND

U- 1H, Ka rbala Road,

Kotkata - 700 018.

2.

Sk. Abdul Hafiz,

U- 1H, Karbala Road,

Kotkata - 700 018.

3.

Kulsum Bibi,

U-1H, Karbala Road,

Kolkata - 700 018.

...

Defendants.

Counsel for the Applicant Bank: -

... Ms. t4ekhala Kanji.

Counsel for the Defendants:-

... Set ex-parte on

13.12.2079

JUDGE14ENT

1.

This is an Transfer Application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 initiated by the applicant against the defendants praying for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs.11,90,773.00 together with interest,_cost- and other usual reliefs.

2.

The brief facts of the case as made out in the Transfer Application by the applicant bank is that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant bank on 2!.l2.ZOO7 for grant of financial assistance for his business wherein the defendants no.2 and 3 had stood as guarantors.

a,

3.

4.

5.

The applicant bank after examining the feasibility of the said proposal had sanctioned a cash credit limit of Rs.1O.OO lakhs on 13.02.2008 in favour of defendant no.1 with certain terms and conditions, which was accepted by the defendants. To avail the above loan, the defendants had executed various loan documents on 18.02.2009 in favour of the applicant bank. To secure the above loan, the defendants no.2 and 3

had created equitable mortgage of their properties in favour of the applicant bank by depositing the original title deed in the bank.

After availing the loan, the defendant no.1 had utilized the said loan amount in his business and operated the loan account at the initial stage but subsequently the defendants had failed to operate the said loan account in terms of the agreement between the parties as a result of which the loan account became irregular. A sum of Rs.11,90,773.00

is due against the defendants which the defendants had not paid despite repeated demands and request, Finding no other way to recover the dues of the bank, the applicant bank had filed this Transfer Application for the recovery of the aforesaid amount and for the issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants.

Notices were issued to the defendants to show cause as to why the relief prayed for by the applicant bank be not granted. After issuance of the notice, the defendants had neither appeared nor had filed their show cause reply. Consequenuy, the said defendants were set ex- parte on 13.12.2019. The Tribunal had no other option but to hear ex- parte against the defendants.

I have heard the learned Counsel

perused the relevant documents.

The defendants had not contested

Thus, the point for determination in

of the applicant bank is within time

for the applicant bank and have

the case of the applicant bank,

this case is (i) Whether the claim

? (ii) Whether the defendants had

o-

6.

8,

7.

utilized the loan facilities granted by the bank ? (iii) whether the defendants are liable to the amount due to the applicant bank or not ?

The applicant bank by oral and documentary evidence has established its case. The documentary evidence comprises from Annexure/Exhibit- A to Annexure/Exhibit-I, which are available in paper book filed by the applicant bank.

From the perusal of the documents referred above and the certified copy of the statement of account, which is flled as Annexu relExhibit-A

to I, it is established that the defendants had availed the financial facilities from the applicant bank and had withdrawn the amount through the account.

The oral testimony comprises of an aFfidavit of Shri R. pal, S/o. Late Nripendra Kumar Pal, working as Asst. Manager & CCO of the Applicant Bank. The averments in the application and the facts stated by the witness of the applicant in his affidavit are unrebutted.

From the perusal of the Statement of Account which is Annexure/Exhibit-I, the totat outstanding comes to Rs.11,80,773.00

which the applicant bank is entifled to recover from the defendants.

In view of the above discussion and after considering the entire evidence-on-affidavit of the applicant bank and the documents filed by the applicant bank, I have no hesitation to hold that the applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.11,90,773.00 from the defendants who are liable for the same. The applicant bank shall also be entitled to pendentelite and future interest on the said amount @

l2o/o pet annum with simple from the date of filing of the Original Application till the date of realization.

9.

10.

11.

0(