BANK OF BARODA Vs. DHARAMPAL SALES CORPORATION
LAWS(DR)-2005-7-6
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on July 19,2005

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.J.Paratwar, - (1.) THIS is an application for recovery of following amounts: Rs. 26,87,827/- from the defendants being dues under overdraft facility together with further interest thereon @ 13.50% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of the filing of the original application till payment and/or full realisation. Rs. 7,27,460/- from the defendants being dues under demand loan facility together with further interest thereon @ 13.50% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of the filing of the original application till payment and/or full realisation. The aforesaid amount is sought to be recovered by liquidating mortgaged property of the defendant No. 2 being Flat No. 42, admeasuring 700 sq. ft. being on the 4th Floor of Juhu Ashish Cooperative Housing Society Limited situated at Plot No. 1 of Suit Plot No. 1, off North South Road No. 10 Juhu Vile Parle Scheme, Mumbai-400049.
(2.) The borrower (defendant No, 2) carries business in the name of defendant No. 1. The defendant No. 3 is sued as guarantor. The applicant's case is that on or about 11th October, 2002 it had sanctioned overdraft facility of Rs. 25 lakh to the defendant No, 1 against mortgage of the defendant No. 2 above mentioned flat and guarantee by the defendant No. 3. The defendant No. 1 executed Demand Promissory Note, Hypothecation agreement and deposited title deeds with intention to create equitable mortgage. The defendant No. 3 gave letter of guarantee. On or about 2nd July, 2003 cash credit facility of Rs. 4,75,000/- was sanctioned and on or about 30th December, 2003 overdraft of Rs. 25 lakh was extended and additional loan of Rs. 6,80 lakh was sanctioned against the extension of the equitable mortgage earlier created. The defendant Nos. 1/2 availed of the loan/credit facilities. However, repayments were not made as agreed. Several defaults were committed but the payment was not made despite repeated demands. Therefore, this original application is filed.
(3.) THE defendants did not appear though served.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.