STATE BANK OF INDIA vs M/S DEEP SIKHA & ORS on 20 July 2020

<5

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIRUNAL.III KOLKATA

PRESENT: -SRI ANIL KUMAR C:HATURVEDI.

PRESIDING OFFICER.

T.A. No. S77 OF 20L4.

State Bank of Ind ia,

Stressed Assets Resolution

Centre, 98, Esplanade Row (E),

2 " Floot, Kotkata - 700 069.

...

t)efendants.

DArE oF DELTVERY oF oRDER . 2o\Tg e9A*

...

Applicant Bank.

-Versus-

1.

lY/s. Deep Sikha,

540, Lake Gardens,

Kolkata - 70O O45_

2.

Shti Prashanta Agarwal,

540, Lake Gardens,

Kotkata - 700 045.

3.

Smt. Surekha Agarwal,

540, Lake Gardens,

Kolkata - 700 045.

Counsel for the Applicant Bank: -

... Shri Kaushik Das.

Counsel for the Defendants:-

... Set ex-parte on

20.12.20t9

r upcE[i:NT

L.

This is an TransFer Applicalon under Sectron 19 of the Reccvery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Irstitutions Act, t.993 tnitiated by the applicant against the defendants f,raying for issu,tnce of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs.32,11,453.65 together With interest, cost and other usual reliefs.

,1. The brief facts of the case as made out in the Transfer Application by the applicant bank is that the defendarnt no.2 for self and on behalf of defendant no.l firm had approached the applicant bark on 16.05.2007

for grant of a cash credit faciiity of Rs,20.OO lakhs for his business N

3.

purposes wherein the defendant no.3 had stood as guarantor. The applicant bank after examining the feasibility of the said proposal had sanctioned a cash credit timit of R5.20.00 lakhs on 13.06.2007 in favour of defendant no.1 firm with certain terms and ,:onditions, which was accepted by the defendants. To ,vail the above loan facillty, the defendants had executed various lo. n documents on 20.06.2007 in favour of the applicant bank. To secure the above loan amount, the defendant no.3 had created equitable mortgage of her immovable property in favour of the appticant bar.tk by depositing the originat tiUe deed in the Bank.

After availing the loan, the defendan. no.l had utilized the said loan amount in its business and operatec the loan accor.lnt 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.32,11,453.65

is due against the defendants which the defendants had not paid despite repeated demands and reqLJest. Finding no other way to recover the dues of the bank, the applicant bank had iiled this Transfer Applicatjon for the recovery of the aforesaid amount and for the issuance of Recovery Certificate againj;t the defendants.

Notices were issued to the defendanl:s 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 neij:her appeared nor had filed their show cause reply. Consequenuy, th{) said defendants were set ex_

parte on 20.12.2019. The Tribunai harj no other optiot but to hear ex_

parte against the defenda nts.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant bank and have perused the relevant docu ments.

L

5.

A.

6.

l

The defendants had not contested the case of the applicant bank.

Thus, the point for determination in this case is (i) Whether the claim of the applicant bank is within time ? (ii) Whether the defendants had 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 docuntentary evidence has established its case, The documentary evidence comprises from Annexure/Exhibit- A to Annexure/Exhibit-O, which are avaitable 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 filed as Annexure/Exhibit-A

to O, it is established that the defer]dants had avarled the financiat facilities from the applicant bank and had withdrawn the amount through the accou nt.

The oral testimony comprises of an affidavit of Shri Mohan Chandra Mondal, S/o. Late Arun Ch. Mondal, lvorking as Chief Manager 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- M, the total outstanding comes to Rs.32,11,453.65

which the applicant bank is entitled 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 hesitntion to hold that the applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.32,11,453.65 from the defendants who are liable for the sante. The applicant bank shall also be entitled to pendentelite and futuro interest on the said amount @

8.

7.

9.

11.

10.

a.

15.5% per annum with simple from the date of filing of the Original Application till the date of realization.