Punjab National Bank Erstwhile United Bank of India vs Smt Aprita Choudhury on 29 December 2023

**J U D G M E N T**

1. This is an application under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, filed by the applicant bank against the sole defendant seeking issuance of Certificate of Recovery for realization of a sum of Rs.41,33,534.00 (Rupees forty one lakhs thirty three thousand five hundred and thirty four) only with interest calculated upto 30.11.2014 and future interest from 01.12.2014 @13.25% p.a. with monthly rests till realization of the entire amount along with injunction restraining the defendant from disposing of and/or alienating and/or encumbering the personal charged and uncharged assets and also costs.

2. The facts in brief, giving rise to the present application as pleaded are that considering the application of the defendant, vide applications dated 07.01.2011, the applicant bank sanctioned to the defendant an Overall limit of Rs. 32,00,000/- (Rupees thirty two lakhs) only [Rs. 16,00,000/- each as two Term Loan accounts] under the CGTMSE Scheme for purchase of two new TATA Volvo Bus, vide Sanction Letter dated 19.01.2011. The defendant on 19.01.2011 executed Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Lien and Deed of Hypothecation. The defendant also executed consent clause in favour of the applicant bank for securing the Term Loans payment. The bus supplier (Contd...)

*Me* 29.12.2023

Siliguri supplied Estimate/Invoice to the defendant on 23.12.2010 and 30.12.2010. The Bhandari Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. sent a requesting letter on 31.01.2011 to the applicant bank for payment delivery of Two Vehicles through RTGS and on 31.01.2011 the defendant requested to the applicant for disbursement of her RTO loan and payment amount to Bhandari Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. and thus the applicant bank issued on 31.01.2011 a D.D. No. 197567 for Rs. 22,60,024.00 in favour of M/s Bhandari Automobiles Pvt. Ltd on behalf of Smt. Arpita Choudhury for purchase of two Volvo Bus. M/s Bhandari Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. on 31.01.2011 accepted the payment, vide letter 31.01.2011. By letter dated 11.04.2011 the defendant requested the applicant bank for 'No Objection' for registration of vehicles and the applicant bank on 08.04.2011 issued No Objection in favour of R.T.A. office of RTO, Alipur Duar, District – Jalpaiguri. After availing the loan, the defendant failed to repay the dues of the loan account and as such the applicant bank sent reminder letters dated 02.04.2012, 18.06.2012 and 27.02.2013 for repayment of overdue amount but the defendants did not make any payment. As the defendants failed to make the repayment of the dues of the accounts, the accounts were classified as N.P.A. on 30.09.2014. The defendant on 31.10.2013 sent a compromise letter to the applicant bank and in reply the applicant bank on 19.12.2013 informed the defendant that the compromise cannot be accepted as per recovery policy of the bank dues. Thereafter the applicant bank on 21.05.2014 sent Demand Notice to the defendant but the defendant failed to comply with the said notice. After giving credits for all sums of moneys paid by and/or realized on behalf of the defendant a sum of Rs.41,33,534.00 (Rupees forty one lakh thirty three thousand five hundred and thirty four) only [ Rs. 20,81,563.00 in Term Loan Account No. 0822300024435 + Rs. 20,51,971.00 in Term Loan Account No. 0822300024444] with interest calculated upto 30.11.2014 was due against the defendant in respect of the loan accounts.

3. Despite the service of summons upon the defendants through newspaper publication, the defendants did not put their appearance before this Tribunal. Hence the defendants were declared to be proceeded ex-parte, vide order dated 22.09.2023.

29/12/2023

Siliguri

(Contd...)

4. The Applicant Bank in support of its case has filed evidence by way of affidavit as affirmed by Sri. Saikat Nag, the Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank (erstwhile United Bank of India) and also relied upon the following documents:- <table border="1"> <thead> <tr> <th>Sl. No.</th> <th>Name of the documents</th> <th>Exhibit No.</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>1.</td> <td>Loan Application dated 07.01.2011</td> <td>1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2.</td> <td>Sanction Letter dated 19.01.2011</td> <td>2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>3.</td> <td>Demand Promissory Note dated 19.01.2011</td> <td>3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4.</td> <td>Letter of Lien dated 19.01.2011</td> <td>4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5.</td> <td>Deed of Hypothecation dated 19.01.2011</td> <td>5</td> </tr> <tr> <td>6.</td> <td>Letter of Consent dated 19.01.2011</td> <td>6</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7.</td> <td>Bio-data along with personal documents</td> <td>7</td> </tr> <tr> <td>8.</td> <td>Estimate/Invoice of Bus suppliers on 23.12.2010 &amp; 30.12.2010</td> <td>8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>9.</td> <td>Requesting Letter for disbursement of RTO Loan by defendant and suppliers on 31.01.2011</td> <td>9</td> </tr> <tr> <td>10.</td> <td>Disbursement Letter along with acknowledgment dated 31.01.2011</td> <td>10</td> </tr> <tr> <td>11.</td> <td>Letter for No Objection dated 08.04.2011</td> <td>11</td> </tr> <tr> <td>12.</td> <td>Certificate of Registration with Tax Token dated 13.03.2013 &amp; 22.03.2013</td> <td>12</td> </tr> <tr> <td>13.</td> <td>Letter for payment of EMI dated 05.09.2011</td> <td>13</td> </tr> <tr> <td>14.</td> <td>Reminder Letter dated 31.10.2013</td> <td>14</td> </tr> <tr> <td>15.</td> <td>Letter for deduction of 50% from overall loan amount due dated 31.10.2013</td> <td>15</td> </tr> <tr> <td>16.</td> <td>Demand Notice dated 21.05.2014</td> <td>16</td> </tr> <tr> <td>17.</td> <td>Statement of account</td> <td>17</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

5. I have heard the learned counsel for applicant bank and perused the documents and evidence adduced by the applicant bank. In order to prove its case, the Applicant bank has exhibited several documents marked as Exhibits '1' to '17'. The sanction of loan has been proved by producing the Sanction Letter dated 19.01.2011 (Exhibit '2'), the execution of required documents like Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Lien, Deed of Hypothecation, Letter of Consent, Requesting Letter for disbursement of RTO Loan by defendant and supplier, Acknowledgment dated 31.01.2011, Certificate of Registration etc. have been proved by exhibiting the same at '3' to '6', '9', '10' & '12'. By filing the statement of account (Exhibit '17'), the applicant bank has proved the total outstanding dues of Rs.41,33,534.00 (Rupees forty one lakh thirty three thousand five (Contd...)

29/12/2022

Siliguri hundred and thirty four) only against the defendant along with the interest calculated upto 30.11.2014.

1. 6. The applicant bank has filed this case against the defendant within three years from the date of last cash deposit made on 09.04.2013 and/or classifying the loan accounts as NPA on 30.09.2014 and as such the claim of the applicant bank is within limitation.

2. 7. The applicant bank has got valid cause of action to file this case as after taking the loan the defendant failed to make payment as per the terms and conditions of the sanction letter agreed by the defendant.

3. 8. There is nothing available on the record to contradict the version of the applicant bank as the ex-parte hearing has been made in this case. Thus the applicant bank has sufficiently proved its case by exhibiting all relevant documents.

In the above circumstances, following order is passed ;

**ORDER**

1. (i) T.O.A.No.952/2017 arising out of O.A. No.16/2015 filed by the applicant bank is allowed against the sole defendant with costs and it is hereby ordered that the applicant bank is entitled to recover the total dues debt amount for Rs.41,33,534.00 (Rupees forty one lakh thirty three thousand five hundred and thirty four) only with interest calculated upto 30.11.2014 and further interest thereon @13.25% p.a. with monthly rests from 01.12.2014 till realization of entire balance from the defendant and also cost of the case.

2. (ii) Amount, if any, paid by the defendant in the loan account or amount recovered by the applicant bank, if any, made towards the loan accounts after filing of the O.A be taken into account while arriving at the exact amount of outstanding payable by the defendant.

3. (iii) The hypothecated properties being Two Volvo Bus No. WB-69-4848 and WB-69-4949, TATA Diesel Chassis Model LPO 1512-TC-55-E-III each, Chassis No. MAT412279BOA00674, Engine No.-01M62973731 and Chassis No. MAT412279BOA00824, Engine No. – 01M62972777 of the defendant at 26/1/A, Sahid Surya Sen Road, Gorabazar, P.S. & P.O. Berhampore, District – Murshidabad, Pin – 742101 and any other place in the name of Smt. Arpita Choudhury as borrower/ defendant, as described in the Schedule "A" of the original application, shall remain (Contd...)

W/o 29/12/2013

Siliguri charged to the applicant bank and the applicant bank shall have paramount charge thereon.

- (iv) The defendant is debarred from transferring; alienating, encumbering or disposing of the hypothecated/mortgaged properties or any other property and assets belonging to the defendant till the aforesaid adjudicated debt amount is recovered from the defendant.

- (v) The defendant is given a time of thirty days from the date of this judgment for repayment of the above decreed debt amount with interest and costs failing which the applicant bank is entitled to recover its dues by sale of the hypothecated/mortgaged property as aforesaid and is also entitled to proceed against the said defendant personally and/or personal properties to recover the dues in accordance with law.

- (vi) Let the certificate of Recovery be drawn up by the Learned Registrar forthwith in terms of judgment for issuance of the same against the defendant in favour of applicant bank under Sub-Section 22 of Section-19 of The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and put up the same for signature and issuance.

- (vii) Learned Recovery Officer is directed to realize the dues amount from the defendant as per the recovery certificate in accordance with law.

- (viii) Let this judgment be uploaded on website of the tribunal and the Registry is directed to serve/send copy of this judgment to the parties free of cost.

- (ix) Record is consigned to the record room along with the judgment.

The judgment is signed and pronounced in the open Tribunal on 29^th day of December, 2023.

*Rakesh Pati Tiwari* **(RAKESH PATI TIWARI)** **Presiding Officer** 29/12/2023 **DRT, Siliguri.**

Siliguri