BANK OF MAHARASHTRA vs NARENDRA OPTICS on 18 June 2019

S- >+

T O A No.512 of 2018

Bank of Maharashtra,

a body corporate under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1

and having its Head Office at'LokManga( ,1501, Presented on : 08/08/20L6

Registered on : 24/0!2018

Transferred on : 19/04/2018

Decided on:L8/06/20L9

Duration : 2a(D)/03(x,{y01 (Y)

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - III AT MUMBAI

DATED THIS 18thf)AY OF IUNE 2019

PRESENT : SHRI. T S ASOKRAI

PRESIDING OFFICER

Shivaji Nagar, Pune - 5 and one of its branch at Moreshwar Smruti, NirmalChawk, Nirmal, Vasai, Dist: Thane - 401 304 thro its Branch

1. Mr. Narendra Kashinath Jadliiiav,

Principal Borrower

Prop : Narendra Optics

Jadhav Pada,

Taluk:Vasai, Dist

Defendant No. L

2. Mr. Balkrushna

Guarantor &

Virar (East)

Tal

Defendar-rt No. 2

J.

Jadhav,

Mandvi, Tal: Vasai, Dist: Thane

Defendant No. 3

Present:

Shri. Sachin A Koli, Advocate, Counsel for Applicant Bank Defendants remained ex-parte This Original Application (OA) is filed by Applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Ac! 1993 ("RDDB Act")

(since changed to"Recovery of De.bts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993") against the Defendants for the recovery of a sum aggregating to Rs. 11.,83,399/43 (Rupees J, )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

).''

)

\'

Applicant

Pada,

Eleven lacs Eighty Three thousand Three hundred and Ninety Nine and paise Forty Three only) in respect of the credit facility mentioned in the OA alongwith cost, charges, pendente lite futttre interest as stated therein from the date of filing of this OA till its realisation.

Parties

Applicant is a "Bank" within Sec. 2(d)

to Defendant No. 1.

Defendant No. 1 is the Sole Proprietor of business under the name and style Narendra facility from the Applicant for the operation of Defendant No. 2 and 3 provided the credit facility and Defendant No property as additional security. %

Factual makix :

1.(a) As per OA, on

Cash Credit

of the RDDB Act and lender

facility

a Sole

the pirrn'1) and availed credit

additional security for

mortgaged his immoveable

Defendant No. 1, the Applicant sanctioned r/- however disbursed / allowed drawl of on Rs. 9

referred to as "CCF") to Defendant No. 1 for the of based on the documentation and security creation by additional security of guaranteebyDefendant No. 2 andS

(b)

2 created mortgage on his immoveable property being House No.

Kaner, Jadhav Pada, Kaner-Khardi Road, Virar (East), Vasai Taluk in Thane District for the sanctioned amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- by executing Deed of Simple Mortgage and getting the same registered with SRO

Vasai - II.

(c)As per OA, the Defendant No. 1 committed various defaults in complying with the terms and conditions of the CCF and, in spite of several reminders, failed to honour the obligation to repay the amount due under the CCF. Consequently, I

J

Order TOA 512 of 2018 (Ex-pafte)(Final)

the Applicant decided to recall the outstanding amount of CCF and issued Recall Notice to all the Defendants calling upon them to repay the entire outstanding amount of the CCF and, on their failure, the OA has been filed.

2. (a)Tribunal, after satisfying itself of the OA being within limitation and falling within its territorial jurisdiction as per RDDB Act, ordered issue of Summons to the Defendants.

(b) Summons to the Defendants were sent by with Acknowledgement Due which got delivered and Acknow received back. Applicant filed Service Affidavit.

adVocate and did not

(c) As Defendants did not appear either in file Written Statements, the Defendants Order of the Tribunal.

Proceedings:

3. As directed by the Tribunal) A

Branch Manager, Claim

(which have

and also filed

under B

AS

on1.4/11,/2018by an

Mr. Amit Babu Dhandore,

set

on

various Documents as Annexures

the Tribunal and marked as "Exhibits")

of Account together with the Certificates 4ct,1891, as Annexures (which are marked vocate for the Applicant also filed a Pursis (Exh errors in the OA as regards details of the documents.

filed as Exhibits and gone through by the Tribunal, the found relevant for the Tribunal to consider and dispose of the OA

r*t.

*q

Order TOA 512 of 201 8 (Ex-pafie)(Final)

Observation on Evidences

4. The Statement

plicant, certified as per Bankers Books

of Evidence

claim in OA. Further, the case of the

Applicant

Documents (including the above referred

Affidavit, which is a sworn Statement, which as Defendants remained ex-parte. In my view, there is disbelieving the Exhibits and Claim Affidavit and other tn by the Applicant and the Applicant has proved its case beyond doubt to the extent of sanctioning the CCF, completing documentation and allowing drawl out of the CCF.

The Applicant has claimed interest at the rate of 1.0.50% p.a. with quarterly rests from the date of filing of the OA till their realisation. Having regards to Sec.

19(20) of the RDDB Act (which is analogous to Sec. 34 of Civil Procedure Code, )

S. No.

Facilitv

Document

Exhibit

Request Letter of

Rs.9,97,000/- (Original)

Defsfor

,r13r,

DP Note for Rs. 9,97,000 / - (Original)

"L4"

Receipt issued by Def 1" for Rs

9,97,000/- (Original)

,r15r,

"1_6"

7"

Comp. Deed of

9,97,000/ - (Orl)

Personal Guarantee of Def 2

Rs. 9,97,000/- (Original)

for

gebyDef2i/r

70,00,000/ -

Deed of

of his

SRO,

(Regd with

,r19il

Cash Credit Facility

(Rs. 10,00,000/ -)

(Disbursed

Rs.9,97,000/ -)

Copy)

N

,r20r,

1S

1908) the contract between the Applicant and Defendants comes to an end on the filing of the OA. Thus the Tribunal has discretion in awarding pendente lite and future interest. Considering the rate of interest charged by banks for similar faclllty,I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the rate interest is awarded at the rate of 10.00% p.a. on simple interest basis.

6. In the light of above discussions, the Original Application is

and

Order passed on the following terms.