MS SHRI KRISHNAN TRADINGS vs UNION BANK OF INDIA on 14 August 2021

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR. ORDER SHEET

M.A. No.52 of 2020 (Arising out of S.A. No.703 of 2019)

<table border="1"><thead><tr><th data-bbox="120 88 180 160">Sl. No.</th><th data-bbox="180 88 308 160">Date of order</th><th data-bbox="308 88 868 160">Order with Signature</th><th data-bbox="868 88 972 160">Action(if any)take n on the order</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td data-bbox="120 160 180 990"></td><td data-bbox="180 160 308 990">14.08.2020</td><td data-bbox="308 160 868 990"><p>The applicant has moved the M.A. No.52 of 2020 aggrieved to the order dated 04.03.2020 passed in S.A. No.703 of 2019. The learned Counsel Shri Rajesh Maindiretta is present on behalf of the Applicant and learned Counsel Shri Shreyas Dubey has appeared on behalf 5of the Respondent Bank through Video Conference.</p><p>The learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has availed financial assistance from the respondent bank. The respondent bank initiated action against the applicants under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002. The Securitisation Application came up for hearing wherein the applicants expressed the desire to make the repayment provided some time is granted to the applicants. The S.A. was disposed off by the Tribunal vide order dated 04.03.2020 in the following terms :-</p><p>"It is hereby directed that in case the applicants deposits a minimum amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs on or before 31.03.2020 and further deposits a minimum amount of Rs.15.00 lakhs on or before 30.04.2020 and thereafter deposits a minimum of Rs.20.00 lakhs by the end of every month and clears the entire outstanding on or before 30.06.2022 alongwith the interest on reducing balance and expenses, the execution of order dated 12.02.2020 passed by D.M., Indore shall be kept in</p></td><td data-bbox="868 160 972 990"></td></tr></tbody></table>

abeyance and Respondents shall not proceed further with any action under the SARFAESI Act."

That on account of the total Lockdown imposed by Central Government and State Government in the State of Madhya Pradesh and the precarious condition prevalent in the city of Indore that the applicants were unable to fulfill the commitment in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal. In Indore the condition is very critical as compared to other Districts in the State and a complete lockdown was imposed.

The applicants submit that they are still willing to comply with the order passed by the Tribunal with a request that the applicant be permitted to deposit the first installment of Rs.10.00 lakhs with effect from 01.01.2021 and further deposit an amount of Rs.15.00 lakhs by 31.01.2021 and thereafter shall keep on depositing minimum of Rs.15.00 lakhs by the end of every month and clears the entire outstanding dues on or before 30.12.2022.

The learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank has submitted that the present M.A. has filed by the Applicant for seeking modification in the order dated 04.03.2020 passed in S.A. No.703 of 2019 in which the Tribunal instead of passing a final order on merits of the case and directed the applicant for repayment of the total huge outstanding of Rs.6,26,85,717.00 in equal installments. As per order, the Tribunal took a lenient view and had directed the borrower to "deposit a minimum amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs on or before 31.03.2020 and further deposits a minimum amount of Rs.15.00 lakhs on or before 30.04.2020 and thereafter deposits a minimum of Rs.20.00 lakhs by the end of every month and clears the entire outstanding on or before 30.06.2020 alongwith interest on reducing balance and expenses." Apart from it, the Tribunal giving protection to the Applicant has kept in abeyance the order for physical possession dated 12.02.2020 passed by D.M., Indore and has further restrained the bank from taking any action under the SARFAESI Act.

The instant M.A. has been filed to seek extension in depositing the total outstanding. The relief sought by the Applicant is strenuously opposed by the Respondent Bank and it is submitted that Applicant has not shown any bona fide which necessitates the relaxation from this Tribunal. The condition on which the Applicant has sought extension of time is beyond comprehension. The Respondent Bank in compliance of the order dated 04.03.2020, had not taken any action against the Applicant in the scheduled time but despite of such bona fide from Respondent Bank, the Applicant has continued with illegalities and contemptuous act of non-compliance of the order of the Tribunal.

The total outstanding as on date is Rs.6,51,72,870.00 and the condition on which the Applicant has sought extension is untenable and there will be a huge loss to the public money and also the securitization action of the Respondent Bank will be severely impacted.

In the above circumstances, the Respondent Bank has prayed this Tribunal the present application filed by the Applicant should be dismissed with heavy cost and the Applicant may be directed to deposit the total outstanding without any further delay and in the event of failure to do so the respondent bank should be permitted to proceed with the Securitization proceedings to recover the huge outstanding.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant and Respondent Bank through Video Conference and have perused the materials on record.

The present M.A. is filed for extension of time of first installment of Rs.10.00 lakhs w.e.f. 01.01.2021 and further deposit of Rs.15.00 lakhs by 31.01.2021 and thereafter shall keep for depositing the minimum of Rs.15.00 lakhs by the end of every month and clear the entire outstanding dues on or before 30.12.2022.

The Counsel for Respondent Bank vehemently opposed and submitted that this Tribunal took a lenient view without there being any bono fide on the part of Applicant to deposit minimum amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs on or before 31.03.2020 and further directed to deposit Rs.15.00 lakhs on or before 30.04.2020 and thereafter to deposit minimum of Rs.20.00 lakhs by the end of every month and clears the entire due on or before 30.06.2022 alongwith interest on reducing balance and expenses.

This Tribunal passed an order and kept in abeyance of the order passed by District Magistrate, Indore and has further restrained the Bank for taking any coercive action under SARFAESI Act.

The submission of the Respondent Bank is that the relief sought by the applicant is seriously opposed and applicant has not shown any bonafide reason which necessitates the relation from this Tribunal and prayed this Tribunal to dismiss the petition.

This Tribunal taken into consideration of the Applicant that the total lock down imposed by the Central Government and State Government in the State of Madhya Pradesh and previous condition convenient in the City of Indore. The applicants are not in a position to pay the amount as agreed by them is taken into consideration and taking principles of natural justice into consideration and as per the decision reported in AIR 1999 SC 3426 between Allahabad Bank Vrs. Radha Krishna Maity and Vol.108 CLT 451 Gobinda Chandra Pattnaik Vrs.PO, DRT & others wherein it is held that Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act (51 of 1993), Ss 19(6), 22-Interim order-power of Debt Recovery Tribunal to pass-Not limited to stay or injunction enumerated in sub-Cl.(6) of S. 19- Tribunal even has wider powers than Civil P.C.- However, it has to observe principles of natural justice, the applicants are directed to pay the first installment of Rs.10.00 lakhs as agreed by them from 1^st October, 2020 and continuously to pay the amount as agreed by them in the order dated 04.03.2020 only, the date of first installment, i.e. 31.03.2020 is modified and time is granted upto 01.10.2020 and rest of the order stands as it is and the applicants are directed to clear total outstanding with interest and costs on or before 31.12.2022.

In case the applicants failed to start payment of first installment on or before 01.10.2020, the Respondent Bank is at liberty to take steps for execution of the order of District Magistrate, Indore after 01.10.2020.

6

With the above observations, the M.A. No.52 of 2020 is disposed and each party shall bear their own costs.

(P. RAVI KIRAN) Presiding Officer. 14/8/2020

Dictated and corrected by me.

(P. RAVI KIRAN) Presiding Officer. 14/8/2020