DRT Tahasinbi Kazi Written Statement

BEFORE THE HON’BLE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL
PUNE AT PUNE
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 715 /2018
CORPORATION BANK ]
A body corporate constituted under the ]
Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer ]
Of Undertakings) Act 1980 having its Head ]
Office at Mangala Devi Temple Road, ]
Mangalore 575001, Karnataka State and having ]
One of its branches at RATNAGIRI, Office ]
No. 2, D Wing, 1st Floor, Jawahar Plaza, Main ]
Road, Ratnagiri – 415 612 though its Br. Manager ]
And Power of Attorney Holder ]
MR.VIVEK BHANUDAS SAWANT ] ….APPLICANT
Versus
1. MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI ]
Age: Adult, Occ: Business ]
2. MR. SIRAJ SARWAR JAHAGIRDAR ]
Both R/at: Flat No.6, Tawakal Apartment, Killa, ]
Tal.& Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 612 ]
3. MR. SURESH KISAN NANDANE ]
C/o: Suresh Digital Photo Studio, ]
Hatiskar Complex, Mandavi, ]
Bandar Road, Ratnagiri- 415 612 ] …DEFENDANTS
No of Additions
No of Corrections
MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI
WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION NO 715 OF 2018 ON THE
BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT NO.1
1. That the Defendant no 1 is well conversant with the fact of the Case and able to
dispose hereto, defendant no 1 state that applicant has read the copy of the
application filed by the applicant and defendant no 1 is filling the present
written statement for the limited purpose of denying false, frivolous and
contention made by the applicant in the said application. Defendant no. 1 states
that Paragraph no.1 of the application is true and correct.
2. Defendant No. 1 states that, contents of the paragraph no.2 applicant are not
true and correct. This Hon’ble Tribunal doesn’t have jurisdiction to try this
matter as the claim of applicant which combines that combination of cash
credit loan and term loan facility. This two are different independent loan
cannot be club together. That defendant no.1 is having cash credit loan facility
of rupees 10 lacs as per the particulars of claim as mentioned in application.
Also applicant bank malafides added rupees 3,29,667 for term loan facility for
different loan account and pertaining to different cause of action to claim such
amount of defendant no.1. Even applicant bank is not coming with clear hand
and amount recoverable pertaining to one loan account before this Hon’ble
Tribunal. Hence with intention to falsely drag pecuniary jurisdiction of this
Hon’ble Tribunal and show claim amount more than 10 lacs. To different
illegal claim for two different bank loans have been mentioned in the
application. On this sole ground this Hon’ble Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try
and liable to be rejected.
3. Defendant no. 1 doesn’t want to say anything on the contents of the paragraph
no. 3. And contents of the paragraph 3-A are false and frivolous.
4. Defendant no. 1states that according to paragraph no. 4 the contents are not
true and correct. The same application doesn’t within period of limitation.
No of Additions
No of Corrections
5. Defendant No.1 states that the content of paragraph.5.1 is not true and correct
and defendant no.1 does not aware about the same.
6. Defendant no.1 states that the contents of paragraph 5.2 are not true and
correct.
7. Defendant no.1 states that defendant no.1 is running the business of fish
trading/ cloth stitching, financial losses and unpredictable loss in business
caused serious danger to defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 states that according
to paragraph no.5.3.1 the contents are true and correct.
8. Defendant no.1 states that according to paragraph no.5.3.2 the contents are not
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct. The contents are false and frivolous.
true and correct. The contents mentioned in the paragraphs are totally false,
defendant no.1 was not aware about the renewal/revival and also about the
interest rates and charges due thereon.
12. Defendant no.1 states that according to paragraph no.5.4 the contents are not
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
No of Additions
No of Corrections
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
27. Defendant no.1 states that the true facts of the case is that-
That defendant no.1 had obtained a loan i.e. cash credit loan and term loan
from applicant bank and was paying her regular EMIs as per agreed terms of
agreement. But applicant bank authority had been started pressurizing
defendant no.1 to pay this entire loan in one lumsum amount of rupees of cash
credit loan and term loan simultaneously. As defendant no.1 was and is ready
to pay legal loan amount payable to bank. As defendant no.1 was and is under
economical loss in her business. Defendant no.1 approached to bank authority
to pay and close some amount and regularize the loan, but bank authority
No of Additions
No of Corrections
refused to take amount and didn’t cooperate to pay EMIs and loan. Also Bank
authority had ill intention to gain excessive interest rates from defendant no.1
while not settling her part loan amount. Hence defendant no.1 couldn’t pay the
loan. But defendant no.1 was and is ready to pay reasonable loan amount taken
by her. It is also pointed out that applicant bank is malafides to sellout her
movable and immovable property of defendant no.1 with hand in glow or
proposed buyer in cheapest rates.
28. Defendant no.1 states that according to paragraph no.6:-
1. Hence in the light of above mention submission defendant no.1 humbly
submits before the Hon’ble Debts Recovery Tribunal Pune that above
Original application kindly be rejected with heavy cost.
2. That other interim, ad-interim reliefs mentioned in the original application
as paragraph no.6 A to L kindly be rejected.
3. Any other order in the interest of justice kindly be passed.
29. Defendant no.1 states that according to paragraph no.7: In the above
submission of true facts of the case that interim, ad-interim orders be rejected
with heavy cost.
30. Defendant no.1 states that on paragraph no.8 defendant no.1 doesn’t want to
comment.
comment.
comment.
comment.
34. Defendant no.1 humbly prays to the Hon’ble Debts Recovery Tribunal that

No of Additions
No of Corrections
as paragraph no.6 A to L and paragraph no.7 kindly be rejected.
Date: 26/04/2019
Pune
Defendant No.1
Advocate for Defendant No.1
VERIFICATION
I, MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI, defendant no.1 above named , adult,
Indian Inhabitant resident of : Flat No.6, Tawakal Apartment, Killa, Tal.&
Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 612do hereby verify that the contents of paras are true to
my knowledge and belief and I believe same to be true and correct.
Solemnly Affirmed at Pune ]
Dated this 26th day of April 2019 ]
Identified by me,
Defendant
No.1
Advocate for defendant no.1
No of Additions
No of Corrections
AFFIDAVIT
PUNE AT PUNE
CORPORATION BANK …APPLICANT
V/S
MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI & ORS …DEFENDANTS
I, MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI, defendant no.1 above named, adult,
Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 612do hereby state on solemn affirmation that I am
conversant with the facts stated in written statement filed for original
application. I repeat and reiterate all that is stated in the written statement
filed for original application are true and correct.
I say that the contents of the above paras 1 to 34 are true and correct to best
of my knowledge, information and beliefs and hence I have sworn this
affidavit on this day of April 2019 at
I know the affiant Affiant
(MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI)
Defendant No.1
No of Additions
No of Corrections
PUNE AT PUNE
CORPORATION BANK ]
A body corporate constituted under the ]
Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer ]
Of Undertakings) Act 1980 having its Head ]
Office at Mangala Devi Temple Road, ]
Mangalore 575001, Karnataka State and having ]
One of its branches at RATNAGIRI, Office ]
No. 2, D Wing, 1st Floor, Jawahar Plaza, Main ]
Road, Ratnagiri – 415 612 though its Br. Manager ]
And Power of Attorney Holder ]
MR.VIVEK BHANUDAS SAWANT ] ….APPLICANT
Versus
1. MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI ]
2. MR. SIRAJ SARWAR JAHAGIRDAR ]
Both R/at: Flat No.6, Tawakal Apartment, Killa, ]
Tal.& Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 612 ]
3. MR. SURESH KISAN NANDANE ]
C/o: Suresh Digital Photo Studio, ]
Hatiskar Complex, Mandavi, ]
Bandar Road, Ratnagiri- 415 612 ] …DEFENDANTS
No of Additions
No of Corrections
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRITTEN
STATEMENT TO THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION NO 715 OF 2018 ON THE
BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT NO.1
I, MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI, defendant no.1 above named, adult,
Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 612do hereby state on solemn affirmation that : -
1. I Defendant no 1 is well conversant with the fact of the Case and able to
dispose hereto, defendant no 1 state that applicant has read the copy of the
application filed by the applicant and defendant no 1 is filling the present
written statement for the limited purpose of denying false, frivolous and
contention made by the applicant in the said application. Defendant no. 1 states
that Paragraph no.1 of the application is true and correct.
2. I Defendant No. 1 state that, contents of the paragraph no.2 applicant are not
true and correct. This Hon’ble Tribunal doesn’t have jurisdiction to try this
matter as the claim of applicant which combines that combination of cash
credit loan and term loan facility. This two are different independent loan
cannot be club together. That defendant no.1 is having cash credit loan facility
of rupees 10 lacs as per the particulars of claim as mentioned in application.
Also applicant bank malafides added rupees 3,29,667 for term loan facility for
different loan account and pertaining to different cause of action to claim such
amount of defendant no.1. Even applicant bank is not coming with clear hand
and amount recoverable pertaining to one loan account before this Hon’ble
Tribunal. Hence with intention to falsely drag pecuniary jurisdiction of this
Hon’ble Tribunal and show claim amount more than 10 lacs. To different
illegal claim for two different bank loans have been mentioned in the
No of Additions
No of Corrections
application. On this sole ground this Hon’ble Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try
and liable to be rejected.
3. I Defendant no. 1 don’t want to say anything on the contents of the paragraph
no. 3. And contents of the paragraph 3-A are false and frivolous.
4. I Defendant no. 1 state that according to paragraph no. 4 the contents are not
true and correct. The same application doesn’t within period of limitation.
5. I Defendant No.1 state that the content of paragraph.5.1 is not true and correct
and defendant no.1 does not aware about the same.
6. I Defendant no.1 state that the contents of paragraph 5.2 are not true and
correct.
7. I Defendant no.1 state that defendant no.1 is running the business of fish
trading/ cloth stitching, financial losses and unpredictable loss in business
caused serious danger to defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 states that according
to paragraph no.5.3.1 the contents are true and correct.
8. I Defendant no.1 state that according to paragraph no.5.3.2 the contents are not
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct. The contents are false and frivolous.
true and correct. The contents mentioned in the paragraphs are totally false,
defendant no.1 was not aware about the renewal/revival and also about the
interest rates and charges due thereon.
12. I Defendant no.1 state that according to paragraph no.5.4 the contents are not
true and correct.
true and correct.
No of Additions
No of Corrections
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
true and correct.
27. I Defendant no.1 state that the true facts of the case is that-
That defendant no.1 had obtained a loan i.e. cash credit loan and term loan
from applicant bank and was paying her regular EMIs as per agreed terms of
No of Additions
No of Corrections
agreement. But applicant bank authority had been started pressurizing
defendant no.1 to pay this entire loan in one lumsum amount of rupees of cash
credit loan and term loan simultaneously. As defendant no.1 was and is ready
to pay legal loan amount payable to bank. As defendant no.1 was and is under
economical loss in her business. Defendant no.1 approached to bank authority
to pay and close some amount and regularize the loan, but bank authority
refused to take amount and didn’t cooperate to pay EMIs and loan. Also Bank
authority had ill intention to gain excessive interest rates from defendant no.1
while not settling her part loan amount. Hence defendant no.1 couldn’t pay the
loan. But defendant no.1 was and is ready to pay reasonable loan amount taken
by her. It is also pointed out that applicant bank is malafides to sellout her
movable and immovable property of defendant no.1 with hand in glow or
proposed buyer in cheapest rates.
28. I Defendant no.1 state that according to paragraph no.6:-
as paragraph no.6 A to L kindly be rejected.
29. I Defendant no.1 state that according to paragraph no.7: In the above
submission of true facts of the case that interim, ad-interim orders be rejected
with heavy cost.
30. I Defendant no.1 state that on paragraph no.8 defendant no.1 doesn’t want to
comment.
comment.
comment.
No of Additions
No of Corrections
comment.
34. I Defendant no.1 humbly prays to the Hon’ble Debts Recovery Tribunal that
as paragraph no.6 A to L and paragraph no.7 kindly be rejected.
I say that the contents of the above paras 1 to 34 are true and correct to best
of my knowledge, information and beliefs and hence I have sworn this
affidavit on this day of April 2019 at
Date: 26/04/2019
Pune
Affiant
I know the affiant
No of Additions
No of Corrections

DRT Tahasinbi Kazi Written Statement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DRT Tahasinbi Kazi Written Statement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BEFORE THE HON’BLE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 715 /2018

A body corporate constituted under the ]

Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer ]

Of Undertakings) Act 1980 having its Head ]

Office at Mangala Devi Temple Road, ]

Mangalore 575001, Karnataka State and having ]

One of its branches at RATNAGIRI, Office ]

No. 2, D Wing, 1st Floor, Jawahar Plaza, Main ]

Road, Ratnagiri – 415 612 though its Br. Manager ]

And Power of Attorney Holder ]

MR.VIVEK BHANUDAS SAWANT ] ….APPLICANT

1. MRS. TAHASINBI AYYAZ KAZI ]

Age: Adult, Occ: Business ]

2. MR. SIRAJ SARWAR JAHAGIRDAR ]

Age: Adult, Occ: Business ]

Both R/at: Flat No.6, Tawakal Apartment, Killa, ]

Tal.& Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 612 ]

3. MR. SURESH KISAN NANDANE ]

Age: Adult, Occ: Business ]

C/o: Suresh Digital Photo Studio, ]

Hatiskar Complex, Mandavi, ]

Bandar Road, Ratnagiri- 415 612 ] …DEFENDANTS

APPLICATION NO 715 OF 2018 ON THE

BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT NO.1

application filed by the applicant and defendant no 1 is filling the present

that Paragraph no.1 of the application is true and correct.

matter as the claim of applicant which combines that combination of cash

of rupees 10 lacs as per the particulars of claim as mentioned in application.

Tribunal. Hence with intention to falsely drag pecuniary jurisdiction of this

and liable to be rejected.

and defendant no.1 does not aware about the same.

trading/ cloth stitching, financial losses and unpredictable loss in business

to paragraph no.5.3.1 the contents are true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct. The contents are false and frivolous.

interest rates and charges due thereon.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

true and correct.

agreement. But applicant bank authority had been started pressurizing

economical loss in her business. Defendant no.1 approached to bank authority

movable and immovable property of defendant no.1 with hand in glow or

proposed buyer in cheapest rates.

28. Defendant no.1 states that according to paragraph no.6:-

1. Hence in the light of above mention submission defendant no.1 humbly

Original application kindly be rejected with heavy cost.

2. That other interim, ad-interim reliefs mentioned in the original application

as paragraph no.6 A to L kindly be rejected.

3. Any other order in the interest of justice kindly be passed.

with heavy cost.