UCO BANK vs ARUNAVA CHATTERJEE AND ORS on 8 September 2020

1. Mr. Arunava Chatterjee, Proprietor of M/s, Chatterjee Distributors, Uttarayan, Rabindranath Avenue, P.O. Sodepur, p.S. Khardah, Dist. 24 pgs (N), Pin -743178.

2. Mrs. Ranjana Chatterjee, Uttarayan, Rabindranath Avenue, p.O. Sodepur, P.S. Khardah, Dist.24 Pgs (N), Pin -743178.

3. Mr. Subinoy Saha, Saha Medical Hall, Sodepur Station Road, Near Sodepur Rly, Station, Dist 24 Pgs (N), P.O. Sodepur, p.S. Khardah, pin - 743778. Defendants. Counsel for the Applicant Bank: - Counsel for the Defendants:- Md Babulal Mollah, Ld Counsel Set ex-parte on t3.07.20t6

1. IuDGEMENT ( otfoS lfoZo-; This is an Original Application under Section L9 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 initiated by the applicant against the defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 praying for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs. 23,44,027.52p together with interest, cost and other usual reliefs. The brief facts of the case as made out in the Original Application by the applicant bank is that the defendant No, 1, Mr. Arunava Chatterjee the proprietor of M/s Chatterjee Distributors was engaged in the whole

2. b

)J, sale trading business of medicines having his prace of business at 'Uttarayan', Rabindranath Avenue, p.O. Sodepur, p.S. Khardah, Dist. 24 Pgs (N), pIN 743178. The defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are the guarantors of the entire loan transaction. The said defendant No. l applied for cash credit facilities on several dates, firsily to the limit of Rs. 1.50 lakhs vide a loan Application dated 05.04.2002 under UCo rraders scheme, then for a Term Loan to the tune of Rs. 35,000/- & a Working Capital Loan of Rs. 2lakhs vide a Loan Application dated 23.04.2003, for Rs.3.5 lakhs vide a Loan Application dated 2L.o2.zoo4, for Rs. 2 rakhs vide a Loan Application dated 09.05.2005 under UCo sherter scheme and rastry to the limit of Rs.8.80 lakhs vide a Loan Apptication dated 16.01.2006 under UCO Traders Scheme in the prescribed form for running his aforesa id business.

4. In consideration of the said loan executed the following loaning and applicant Bank. facilities, the said defendant No. 1 security documents in favour of the i) Loan agreement dated 18.05.2005 agreeing and undertaking amongst others to repay the loan of Rs. 2lakhs with interest @ Bolo p.a.in 120 EMIs of Rs.2,426/-, A Demand promissory Note of Rs. 1 rakhs dated 10.04.2002 with Waive Presentment Note and a forwarding letters of the same date. A demand promissory Note of Rs. 2.5 lakhs dated 28.04.2003 with Waive Presentment Note and a forwarding letter of the same date. A Demand Promissory Note of Rs.3.50 lakhs dated 27.02.2004 with Waive Presentment Note and a forwarding letter of the same date. A Demand Promissory Note of Rs. 5 lakhs dated 03.02.2005 with Waive Presentment Note and a forwarding letter of the same date. ii) iii ) iv) v) o-

6.

vi) A Demand promissory Note of Rs. 7 lakhs dated 17.01.2006 with waive presentment Note and a forwarding letter of the same date. vir) Hypothecation of Goods to secure a Demand cash credit for Rs. 1 rakh dated 10.04.2002 hypothecating a, kinds of medicine, chemicars, drugs etc. purchased or to be purchased and stocked or to be stocked at the borrower,s shop.

viii) Hypothecation of Goods to secure a Demand cash credit for Rs. 2.5 lakh, other allied products purchased or to be purchased, stored or to be stored at Borrower,s shop/ godown.

5. The defendant Nos. 2 & 3 joinily executed a retter of Guarantee dated 18.05.2005 agreeing and undertaking on demand to pay and discharge the present and future riabirities of the borrower to the applicant Bank. The defendant No. 1, the borrower executed on 29.05.2009 an "Agreement on rescheduring/ rephasing of term roan agreeing amongst others to repay the outstanding balance of Rs. 2,29,939/_ as on 29.05.2009 in 84 EMIs of Rs.3,670l_ each p.m. commencing from April, 2005. The defendant Nos. 2 & 3, the guarantors, joinUy executed on 29.05.2009 an ,Agreement on Rescheduling/ Rephasing of Term Loan agreeing to repay the outstanding balance of Rs. 2,29,939/_ as on 29.05.2009. The Defendant No. 1 through a retter dated 03.02.2005 to the applicant Bank admitted that the barance due on 03.02.2005 in his C/C/ A/c was Rs.3,50,347.63. The defendant No. 1 as a security against the said loan granted to the said defendant created equitable mortgage by depositing on

17. L2.2003 through letters, the Title Deed in original being No. 9362 of 2002. The said defendant also executed an Affidavit dated

7. B.

9.

10. 13.05.2003 before the Notary public, Sealdah in support of his ownership tiile upon the said property. After avairing the roan, the defendant had utirized the said roan amounts in his business and operated the roan accounts at the initial stage but subsequentry the defendants had failed to operate the said loan accounts in terms of the agreement between the parties as a result of which the loan accounts became irregular. A sum of Rs.23,44,027.52 (Rupees twenty three lakh forty four thousand twenty seven and paise fiFty two) is due against the defendants which the defendants had not paid despite of repeated demands and request. Finding no other way to recover the dues of the bank, the appricant bank had fired this originar Apprication 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 appeared through their counser but the defendants faired to fire the show cause repry and absented themselves from the proceedings. Consequenfly, the said defendants were set ex-parte. The Tribunar had no other option but to hear ex- parte against the defendants. I have heard the rearned counser For the appricant bank and have perused the relevant documents. The defendants had not contested the case of the appricant bank. Thus, the point For determination in this case is (i) whether the craim of the applicant bank is within time ? (ii) whether the derendants had utirized the roan facirities granted by the bank ? (iii) whether the defendants are riabre to the amount due to the appricant bank or not ? 11, L2

13. a-

14. The applicant bank by oral its case. The documentary

(s) and documentary evidence has established evidence comprises from Annexure_A to

15. Annexure-L, which bank. are available in paper book filed by the applicant From the perusar of the documents referred above and the certified copy of the statement oF account, which is fired as Annexure ,1,, it is estabrished that the defendants had avaired the financiar facirities from the appricant bank and had withdrawn the amount through the account. The oral testimony comprises of an affidavit of Mr. palash Halder, son of sri Ajit Kumar Harder, working as senior Manager of the Appricant Banks office at panihati Branch at Shopping Complex, 27,8.T. Road, P.O. Panihati, Kolkata - 7OOO'4. 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-1, the total outstanding comes to Rs.23,44,027.52 (Rupees twenty three rakh forty four thousand twenty seven and paise rifty two) which the appricant bank is entitred to recover from the defenda nts. In view of the above discussion and after evidence-on-affidavit of the applicant bank and considering the e ntire the documents filed by the applicant bank, I have no hesitation to hold that the applicant bank is entiUed to recover a sum of Rs.23,44,027.52 (Rupees twenty three lakh forty four thousand twenty seven and fifty two paise) from the defendants who are riabre for the same. The appricant bank sha, also be entifled to pendenterite and future interest on the said amount

16.

77.

18. @ 12.5olo per annum with simple from the date of filing of the Original Application till the date of realization.

ORDER

T.A. No. 478 of 2014 filed by the Applicant Bank is allowed and debt is determined with cost against the defendants. It is hereby ordered that applicant bank is entitled to recover from the defendants the total amount to the tune of Rs.23,44,027.52 (Rupees twenty three lakh forty four thousand twenty seven and fifty two paise) with pendentelite and future interest @ 12.5olo per annum with simple on the amount due from the date of filing of the Original Application, l.e. 17.11.2014 till full and final realization of the claim amount.

(2) Amount, if any, paid by the defendants in the loan accounts or amount, if any, recovered by the Applicant Bank after filing of the O.A. the same be taken into account while arriving at the exact amount of dues/debt payable by the defendants. Accordingly, pendentelite and future interest shall be calculated on the reduced amount.

(3) Defendants are debarred from disposing, alienating or dealing with any of the properties belonging to defendants till the aforesaid decretal debt is recovered from the defendants'

(4) Defendants are given a time of thirty days from the date of the -ludgement/Final Order for repaying oF the above mentioned dues, so intimated to them In case the defendants fail to pay the dues within the above mentioned time, the applicant bank is entitled to recover its dues by sale of secured assets, if any. Applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against personal properties of the defendants (Both movable and immovable) and also proceed a- (s)

against the defendants personally to recover the dues in accordance with law. Let the Certificate of Recovery be drawn up by Ld. Registrar forthwith in terms of Judgement for issuance of the same against defendants in favour of the applicant bank under Section L9 (22) ot the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and put up the same for issuance of the Certificate.

(6) Ld. Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the Recovery Certificate from the defendants in accordance with law.

(7) Ld. Registrar of this Tribunal is directed to deliver recovery certificate in term of the final order/judgement for recovery of the sum against the defendant in favour of the Applicant Bank under Section 19 (22) of the Recovery of Debts due to the Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 now known as Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. (B) The parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer on 76.1,0.2020 for further action in accordance with law in the event the entire amount is not paid by the said date. Accordingly, the Original Apptication being T.A. No. 478 of 2Ot4 is allowed and stands disposed of. Copy of the Judgement/Final Order be uploaded jn the Tribunal,s website. ( Dictated to Steno, tranpprpe_dby her, corrected, signed and e pronounced by me in tnepfdfi^Court on this the OBfi&I^r, 2O2O) A.f. gU"^^*"1 ( ANIL KUMAR CHATURVEDI ) PRESIDING OFFICER.

UCO Bank T.A.l478l of 2014 Mr. Arunava Chatterjee & Ors. { aEl€))'>- Order No.ltl Order pronounced (vide separate sheets). L V;*..t^RC,*^i.{ In the resurt, T.A. No. 478 of 2oL4 is ailowed with costs. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

a. f- t/"'x^"atg"S pr). (,,\.K. Chaturvedi) Presiding Officer DRT-3, Kolkara.