MAHARAJ JI EDUCATION TRUST Vs. PUNJAB AND SIND BANK
LAWS(DR)-2007-5-1
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on May 11,2007

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.S. Tripathi, J. (Chairperson) - (1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 25th August, 2005 passed by the D.R.T., Lucknow in T.A. No. 333/02 for issuance of recovery certificate for a sum of Rs. 26,75,98,861/ - along with pendente lite and future interest @ 16% per annum with quarterly rest from the date of application after adjusting the amount, if any, already deposited + cost. Briefly stated the facts of the present appeal are as under:
(2.) APPELLANT claims to be a public charitable trust registered on 6th January, 1993 at Chennai with its branch at Ghaziabad (U.P.) through Mrs. Kuyilambal wife of late Paramasiyam and Dr. P. Mahalingam with a view to impart medical education by establishing Nursing College, etc. to provide medical help and to plan such activities of the nature of general public utility. Dr. P. Mahalingam was shown as Chairman/Managing Trustee whereas Mrs. Kuyilambal was shown as a trustee. It is said that the purpose of above Trust was to impart medical education and it was running medical colleges in the name and style of Santosh Medical College, Santosh Dental College, Santosh College of Occupational Therapy, Santosh College of Physiotherapy, Santosh College of Radiology and Imaging Technology, Santosh College of Lab Technology, Santosh College of Medical Microbiology at Ghaziabad with necessary approval from Central Government, Government of U.P., Medical and Dental Council of India affiliated with Choudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut (U.P.). Defendant No. 1 Trust through appellant Nos. 2 and 3 in September 1997 approached the respondent No. 1 Bank for the grant of a term loan of Rs. 9.60 crores for the purchase of medical equipments, machinery and other assets for the purpose of their installation in Medical Colleges/Hospitals. The loan was secured by the hypothecation of equipment, machinery and other assets as well as equitable mortgage of land situated at Thandalam village, Sriperumpudhur Taluk, Chennai, Tamilnadu. The appellant after availing the term loan of Rs. 9.36 crores for the aforesaid purchases, paid a sum of Rs. 2,47,22,225/ - towards this term loan No. 1. The details of break -up of these payments are as under: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date Amounts (Rs.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19th February, 1998 8,20,840/ - 30th April, 1998 22,92,472/ - 30th September, 1998 23,77,527/ - 31st December, 1998 10,48,055/ - 31st December, 1998 1,49,720/ - 31st December, 1998 19,06,331/ - 20th April, 1999 32,77,782/ - 2nd November, 1999 36,14,498/ - 2nd February, 2000 12,00,000/ - 3rd February, 2000 22,00,000/ - 20th February, 2000 15,00,000/ - 20th February, 2000 2,00,000/ - 1st April, 2000 41,35,000/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(3.) THE appellant No. 1 further approached the respondent No. 1 Bank for sanction of 2nd term loan of Rs. 15.00 crores on 18th October, 1999 to liquidate the liability of loan for working capital availed from HUDCO and to complete the infrastructure i.e. construction of building by Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Respondent No. 1 Bank sanctioned another term loan No. 2 for a sum of Rs. 10.00 crores on 26th November, 1999 for its payment to HUDCO in order to liquidate the liability of appellant No. 1 and for this appellant No. 1 created an equitable mortgage of various flats owned by appellant No. 1 situated at Ghaziabad as well as vacant land owned by petitioner situated at Chennai, which had also been mortgaged for payment of first loan of Rs. 9.36 crores. Appellant No. 1 availed the 2nd term loan amount of Rs. 10.00 crores to liquidate the liability of working capital availed from HUDCO and for the payment to Larsen & Toubro Ltd. For construction of medical college building, the appellant No. 1 paid a sum of Rs. 19,40,000/ - on 3rd May, 2000 and a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/ - on 5th June, 2000, thus a sum of Rs. 25,90,000/ - was paid towards term loan No. 2. The respondent No. 1 Bank did not receive the instalments in connection with above two term loans. Then notice was issued to the appellants and thereafter a suit for recovery of Rs. 26,75,98,861/ - was filed claiming interest pendente lite and future @ 16% with quarterly rests covering both the loans. The Bank pleaded in the original application filed before the D.R.T. that the appellant No. 1 was a public charitable trust with object of advancement of education for establishment of nursing college, medical reliefs, advancement of other objects for general public utility. The required documents for above two loans were executed by the appellants and the properties were mortgaged as per the requirements. The Syndicate Bank was also impleaded as party in the original application and it claimed its first charge over the flats situated at Ghaziabad on the basis of equitable mortgage in its favour.;


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