BANK OF BARODA (DENA BANK) vs EKNATH on 27 February 2019

')

i!

i

:i

[-x1., -'25

Presented on : 04/04/20L4

Registered on : 20/06/201'6

Transferred on : 03ft0/20L6

Decided on:27/02/20L9

Duration : 07(D)/08(MY02(Y)

Dena Bank,

a body corporate

(Acquisition and

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - III AT MUMBAI

DATED THIS 2TthDAY OF FEBRUARY 2019

PRESENT : SHRI. T S ASOKRAJ

PRESIDING OFFICER

T O A No. 1-71,3 of 20'l'6

under The BankingComPanies

Transfer of Undertaking)Act 1970

having its Head Office at Dena Corporate Centre, C-LO,'G" Block, Bandra -Kurla ComPlex, Mumbai-400 051 office amongst other p ofits Branch Office at Post Tilak Road, Branch, Taluk Malegaon, Dist through Chief Manager Applicant 1,. Shri. Eknath Kashiram Post: Yesgaon Defendant No. 1

Dist: Nashik. Pin

2. Shri. Sanjay

Post: Yes

Malegaon,

Dist: N

Defendant No. 2

J.

Thakre,

Taluk: Malegaory

Code -423203

Defendant No. 3

Present

J K Naik, Learned 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 Act, 1993 ("RDDB Act")

(since changed to "Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993") against the Defendants for the recovery of a sum aggregating to Rs. 44,63,077 /- (Rupees Forty )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Order TOA 1713 of 2016 (Ex-par1e)(Final)

Four lacs sixty Three thousand and seventy seven only) in respect of the various credit facilities mentioned in the oA alongwith cos! charges, pendente lite futtxe interest as stated therein from the date of filing of this OA till its realisation'

Parties

Applicant is a Bank within Sec. 2(d) of the RDDB Act and lender of credit facilities to Defendant No. L, an agriculturist and farmer by occupation'

DefendantNo.lto3areindividuals.DefendantNo.2artdS

security by way of personal guarantee

No. l from the APPlicant.

Factual matrix:

1.(a) As per OA, APPlicant

("Credit Facility")

('MTL') and Rs. 7,23,966/

Defendant No. 1

Defendant No

for the credit

ties

to Rs. 26,28,344/-

way of Medium Term Loan

Term Demand Loan ("STL") to

tation and securitY creation bY

and 3 providing additional security in

Facility and to facilitate availing the Credit mortgage on his agricultural land located in of (b)

the form of

As prelude

Facilitv

J)

Yesgaon, Taluk Malegaon, District Nashik' by und.erSec.5ofMaharashtraProvisionofFacilitiesfor by Bank Act, !974 and got the same registered with SRO'

besides getting the Declaration registered in the 7 / 12 Register under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code,1 966.

(c) At the request of Defendant No. 1 for renewal and restructurinS, , the Applicant restructured the Credit Facility and Defendant No. 1 executed 2 Agreements for Restructure of Cred.it Facility capturing the terms and conditions of renewal and restructuring.

J

(d) As per oA, the Defendant No. 1, in spite of repeated and several demands, failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues in respect of the Credit Facility as stated in the oA. Applicant, consequently, by way of Advocate Notice, called upon the Defendants to rePay the entire outstanding amount of the Credit Facility and, on the failure of the Defendants to repay, the OA has been filed.

2. (a)Tribunal, after satisfying itself of the OA being within falling within its territorial jurisdiction as per RDDB Ac! ordered Defendants.

(b) Transfer Notices to the Defendants

Acknowledgement Due. A11 the postal

by

undelivered with Postal

endorsement "tefused to take return

gulation 19 of The

Regulations of Practice 2010 (

conferred under sub-

Section(1) of Section 22 of

declared that the Transfer

Notices are deemed to have

(c) As Defendants did not

ln

or through advocate and file

Written

set ex-parte on 08/12/2017 bY an

Order of the

Proceedings

Applicant filed, through Shri' Nitin Gunvantrao Manager, Claim Affidavit enclosing various Documents hich have been taken on record by the Tribunal and marked as and also filed certified statement of Account together with the Certificates under Bankers Books of Evidence Act, 189'l', as Annexures (which are marked as ExhibTt "2g", '30", "31' &' "32")' Of the Documents filed as Exhibits and gone through by the Tribunal, the following are found relevant for the Tribunal to consider and dispose of the OA on merit'

to

Post with

J.

Observation on Evidences

4. The Statement

certified as per Bankers Books

of Evidence

claim in OA. Further, the case of the

Applicant

Documents (including the above referred

bi

Affidavit, which is a sworn Statement, which Lr *y view, there is no question of disbelieving the Affidavit and other evidences let in by the Applicant and has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt to the extent of the Credit Facility, completing Documentation and disbursement of the Credit Facilitv.

J

5. The Applicant has claimed interest at the rate of 13.50% p.a. with half-yearly rests for both MTL and STL from the date of fili.g of the OA till its realisation.

Exhibit

Document

S. No.

Facility

,r13r,

Loan Proposal & BM RePort (Office

Copy)

,r74r,

Demand Promissory Note (Original)

,r15r,

Hypothecation Agreement (Original)

'18"

Personal Guarantee of Def. 2 & 3

(Original)

Vro"

u. \6,

Sias .'#

kfl

Mortgage by way of

Def 1 and Regd with SRO,

,r24r,

MTL

Agreement

execu

./.J

of MTL

,r29il

Copv)

Recall Notice (Office

1..

Credit Facility

(Rs.26,28,344/ -)

comprising of

Med. Term Loan

(Rs.19,04,378/ -)

Short

Term

Demand Loan

(Pts.7,23,966/-)

Having regards to Sec. 19(20) of the RDDB Act (which is analogous to Sec. 34 of 2 (Copy) with English Translation t

Order TOA l7l3 ol2016 (Ex-parte)(Final)

Civil Procedure Code, 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 facilities, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the rate interest is awarded at the rate of L2'00% p'a'

on simple interest basis for both MTL and STL

In the light of above discussions, the Original Application Order passed on the following terms'