BANK OF INDIA vs SUBHASISH GUHA AND ANR on 20 July 2020

7;l

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRlBUNAL-III KOLKATA

PRESENT: -SRI ANIL KUIVIAR CHATURVEDI.

PRESIDING OFFICER.

T.A. No,815 OF 2014.

DArE OF DELTVERY OF ORDER ,1Z|$.O7.ZOZO a 'A-o-.

Bank oF India,

Mirhati Bra nch,

Village & P.O. : Mirhati,

24 Pa rganas ( North),

PrN - 700 125.

1.

Shri Subhasish Gu ha,

S/o. Subrata Guha,

Village - Debinaga r,

P.O. : Birati, Dist. 24 Parganas

(North), PIN - 700 051.

2.

Shri Sa njib Das,

S/o. Mahadeb Das,

Village - Debinagar,

P.O. : Birati, Dist.24 Parganas

(North), PIN - 700 051.

...

Applicant Bank.

-Versus-

...

Defendants.

Counsel for the Applicant Bank: -

... Shri layanta

Bhattacha rya,

Counsel for the Defendants:-

... Set ex-parte on

20.72.2019

]UDGEIVIENT

1.

This is an Transfer Application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Flnancial Institutions Act, 1993 initiated by the applicant aqainst the defendants praying for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs,13,83,440.00 together with interest, cost and other usual reliefs,

2. The brief facts of the case as made out in the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant bank on 20.12.2010 for grant of a term loan for the purpose of purchase of a Truck of Ashok Leyland Comet Gold A

3.

4.

5.

1616 IL BSIII for his transport business wherein the defendant no.2

had stood as guarantor. The applicant bank after examining the feasibility of the said proposal had sanctioned a term loan of Rs.11.14

lakhs on 03.01.2011 under CGTMSE Scheme in favour of defendant no.1 with certain terms and conditions, which was accepted by the defendants. It was also stipulated in the sanction letter that the said amount shall be payable in 84 equal monthly installments of Rs.19,369.00 commencing from 31.05.2011. To avail the above loan amount, the defendants had executed various loan documents on 06.01.2011 in favour of the applicant bank.

After the execution of the loan documents, the applicant bank had released the loan amount in favour of the defendant no.1 and the defendant had purchased the said vehicle and got the same registration bearing Registration No.WB-25D-7698 and ply the same for his transport business. The said vehicle was also secured by hypothecation to the bank.

After availing the loan, the defendant no.1 had utilized the said loan amount ln his transport 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.13,83,440.00 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 Rled 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 repiy. Consequently, the said defendants were set ex- a- 6,

7.

parte on 20.12.2019. The Tribunal had no other option but to hear ex- parte against the defendants.

I have heard the learned Counsel tor the applicant bank and have perused the relevant documents.

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 tlme ? (ii) Whether the defendants had utilized the loan facilities granted by the bank ? (iii) Whether both 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-M, 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 filed as Annexure/Exhlbit-A

to lvl, 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 Madhu Sudan Das, S/o. Late M. N. Das working as Senior Manager of the Appltcant 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-K, the total outstanding comes to Rs.13,83,440.00

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 hesitation to hold that the applicant B,

9.

10.

11.

72.

^*

bank is entitled to

A

recover a sum of Rs.13,83,440.00 from the defendants who are liable for the same. The applicant bank shall also be entitled to pendentelite and future 13.575o/o per annum with simple from interest on the said amount @

the date of filing of the Original

Application till the date of realization.