Public excerpt

191090002952020_7b1da17cbbf08ad6a77e994fd5735c6a.pdf

Pages: 5Characters (full): 5831

Full judgment text and the official PDF are available after sign-in. This page shows an excerpt for discovery and research previews only.

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
                                (Appeal No. 10 of 2021)
                     (Arising out of O.A. 618 of 2017  in DRT, Cuttack)
THE HON’BLE  MR.  JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
             CHAIRPERSON
24.6.2022
HDFC Bank Limited    … Appellant
              -Vs-
M/s. Maa Tarini Enterprisers & 
Others  
       …  Respondents
Mr. 
Samik 
Basu,  
Learned 
Counsel for Appellant
Ms. Sonali Das with Mr.  Kuntal 
Goswami,  Learned Counsel for 
Respondent
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :  
The instant appeal has been preferred against the 
impugned order dated 3rd March, 2020 whereby the Learned 
DRT, Cuttack has quantified the amount of Rs.26,19,996  as 
outstanding as on the date of filing of the O.A.  An amount 
of Rs.20.00  lac was paid on 18th January, 2020 by the 
Defendant. 
Learned 
DRT 
quantified 
the 
amount 
as 
Rs.26,19,996.15p and directed  the Bank to deliver the re-
possession of the property; subject to the condition that 
Bank would be entitled for 10% simple interest on this 
amount from 18th January, 2020 till payment is made and 
Bank should submit a detailed calculation in the mean time 
before the Learned Recovery Officer.
This order was passed in the Review Application filed by 
the Appellant to review the order dated 4th January, 2020 
wherein the following directions were issued :

2
i)
An amount of Rs.20,00,000/- to be paid within 15 days 
from the date of this order.
ii)
The remaining balance amount of Rs.5,31,384.15ps to 
be paid by the defendants jointly and severally along 
with 
simple 
interest 
@10% 
per 
annum 
on 
Rs.25,31,384.15ps on or before 31.3.2020. Interest on 
Rs.34,06,384.15ps from the date of O.A.  till payment 
of Rs.8,75,000/-@10% simple and Rs.25,31,381.15ps 
from the date of payment of Rs.8,75,000/- till payment 
of Rs 20,00,000/- @10% simple and after payment of 
Rs 
20,00,000/- 
on 
the 
balance 
amount 
of 
Rs.5,31,384.15ps @ 10% simple till payment of 
amount.
iii)
The respondent bank is entitled only simple interest not 
compound rate.
iv) 
The defendants are further liable to pay the costs of OA 
and the defendants are directed to clear the entire total 
outstanding amount including costs before 31.3.2020. 
In case the defendants failed to clear the outstanding 
amount as observed above by this Tribunal the 
applicant bank is at liberty to take steps for issuance of 
Recovery Certificate.
 
vi) 
The mortgage of the property will be cleared after total 
amount is paid by the defendants.
It appears that in the meantime, an order was passed 
by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for Orissa at Cuttack  
on 21st May, 2020 wherein the writ petition was disposed of 
with a direction to the Bank to hand over possession of the 
house in question to the petitioner by 23rd May, 2020 with a 
further direction to the petitioner that he shall file an 
undertaking before the Hon’ble High Court that  
the 
petitioner will pay the remaining amount of Rs.6,19,996.15p 

3
together with simple interest @ 10% per annum from 18th 
January, 2020 till actual payment is made within two 
months. It was further observed that quantification of the 
amount by the Learned Tribunal, under the impugned 
orders, would be subject to further order as may be passed 
by the DRAT in appeal to be filed by the Respondent Bank.
Learned 
Counsel 
for 
Respondent 
submits 
that 
Respondent complied the direction of the  Hon’ble High 
Court  by depositing a sum of Rs.6,51,000.00 on 17th July, 
2020.
Appeal  has been preferred on the ground that there is 
a finding recorded by the Learned DRT on the fact that  
principle amount of Rs.26,19,996.15p is quantified as 
balance outstanding but it is erroneous. Learned Counsel 
submits that in the Review Petition, it was the ground that 
the amount, Rs.25,31,384.15p, in the initial order dated 4th 
January, 2020, is erroneously recorded. Now even in the  
Review Petition quantification of the amount is erroneously 
made. In para 5 of 
Search more judgments