III

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF AUGUST, 2019
BEFORE: SHRI SANJEEV MAGO, PRESIDING OFFICER
OA NO.3067/2017

Allahabad Bank, a body corporate constituted under the

banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking)

Act, 1970, having its Head office at 2 N.S. Road, Kolkata

700001 and amongst other places a Branch at SCF 73, Phase-

9, Mohali, through Sh. Vimal Kumar Bansal S/O Sh. Roop

Chand Bansal, Asst. General Manager and duly constituted

| Printed using casemine.com by licensee : NISHIT GOKHRU (Student)

attorney of the applicant Bank, presently posted at Allahabad

Bank, SCF No. 73, Phase-9, Mohali.

……..Applicant Bank

Versus

1. M/S Krish Multimetals through its Prop Sh. Nikhil Satija

(Borrower) S/o Sh. Satish Satija, Shop No. 93-94, Kang

Market, Loha Bazar, Old Post Office Road, Mandi

Gobindgarh, Punjab.

Registered Office: Plot No. 220, 1st Floor, Phase 9-

Industrial Area, Mohali,

Factory Site: D-16 (P), Focal Point, Mandi Gobindgarh.

2. Sh. Nikhil Satija (Proprietor/Guarantor), R/O House No.

85/17, New Khanna City, Bullepur Road, Mandi

Gobindgarh.

……….Defendants

Advocates:
Sh. Sumit Batra, counsel for the applicant bank
Sh. Vivek Verma, counsel for defendants
 2
ORDER

1. The brief facts of the case are that defendants had

approached the applicant bank and requested for the grant of

Cash credit facility of Rs.10.00 Lakh & TL of Rs.15.00 Lakh

vide loan application dated 22.08.2014 is Annexure A2 after

considering the financial need of defendants, applicant bank

sanctioned above said loan facilities to the defendants vide

sanction letter dated 14.10.2014 is Annexure A3 and terms

and conditions were accepted by the defendants.

| Printed using casemine.com by licensee : NISHIT GOKHRU (Student)

2. The above said documents were executed and the loan

facility was availed by the borrower and later on the defendant

violated the terms and conditions of the said loan agreement

and did not adhere to the agreed financial discipline thereafter,

legal notices sent to borrower to regularize his account but

borrower did not repay the amount to bank and bank filed this

OA to recover the total sum of Rs.25,61,508.00 from

31.05.2017 together with interest @12.70%p.a. in both

accounts, till final payment along with all costs from

defendants, jointly and severally.

3. Defendants were served notices to appear and after

service of notices, the defendants appeared and filed written

statement. Thereafter, Sh. Mayank, Bank Officer appeared and

brought all original documents which were shown to the

counsel for defendants for admission & denial and he denied

the contents of the documents and admitted the signatures

and also denied POA. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh.

Vimal Kumar Bansal, AGM has been filed.

4. The brief facts of the written statement filed by the

defendant are that the applicant bank did not fully disburse all
 3
credit facilities and obtained their signatures on blank

documents. The statement of account has not been filed in

accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Bank Book

Evidence Act, 1981 and has no evidentiary value. No cause of

action has been arisen in favour of applicant bank to file this

OA and OA is barred by limitation. The application has not

been filed by a competent & authorized person. Bank has

claimed exaggerated amount by charging exorbitant interest.

This Hon’ble Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide and enter

| Printed using casemine.com by licensee : NISHIT GOKHRU (Student)

this OA and prayed to dismiss the OA.

5. Following issues are framed:-

1. Whether the applicant bank is entitled to recover

Rs.25,61,508.00? If yes, then on how much interest?

2. Relief.

Point 1

As far as issue no.1 is concerned, to prove this issue

bank has exhibited documents A1 to A15 from the perusal of

all these documents, it is very much clear that defendants

approached applicant bank for taking loan and bank

sanctioned loan and when defendants did not pay the

installments in time, account of borrower was declared as NPA

and instead of service of legal notices on defendants, they did

not repay the amount to the bank. In written statement,

defendant no.1 has admitted that signatures were obtained on

blank documents. It is well settled principle of law that when a

person signs any document then it is a presumption that

documents have been executed in his presence and with his

consent. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence, it cannot

be said that the signatures were obtained on blank documents.

 4
At the time of admission & denial, merely by denying contents

of the documents did not create any doubt on the reliability of

the documents, therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the

documentary evidence produced by the applicant bank.

Therefore, from the perusal of all the documents from

Annexure A1 to A15, it is proved that bank is entitled to

recover Rs.25,61,508.00 from defendants, jointly and

severally.

The bank has claimed interest @12.70%p.a. in both

| Printed using casemine.com by licensee : NISHIT GOKHRU (Student)

accounts from 31.05.2017 till the realization as per agreement

between the parties. Therefore, Bank is entitled to recover

Rs.25,61,508.00 with a simple interest @12.70%p.a. in both

accounts from the date of filing of OA till the realization of

money.

Therefore, this issue is decided in favour of the applicant bank.

Point 2

Since, issue no.1 has been decided in favour of the applicant

bank, therefore, applicant bank is entitled to relief claimed in

OA.

6. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that

the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

Rs.25,61,508.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Sixty One

Thousand Five Hundred Eight only) jointly and severally, with

costs, current and future simple interest @12.70%p.a. in both

accounts from 31.05.2017, till the date of realization of the

amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be entitled to

recover aforesaid amount from the sale of

hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in

execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions

 5
of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank still

remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by

attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The

applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process

of law.

7. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

8. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

9. Parties to appear before ld. Recovery Officer concerned

on 02.11.2019.
| Printed using casemine.com by licensee : NISHIT GOKHRU (Student)

10. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank

and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and

record be consigned.

Dated: 31.08.2019 (Sanjeev Mago)

Presiding Officer,
DRT-III, Chandigarh

Order dictated, corrected, signed and pronounced by me

in the open court.
Dated: 31.08.2019
(Sanjeev Mago)
Presiding Officer,
DRT-III, Chandigarh