Civil Appeal No. 8443 of 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 24745 of 2007) and Civil Appeal No. 8444 of 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 3373 of 2008). Case: 1. Punjab and Sind Bank, 2. Allied Beverage Company Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs 1. Allied Beverage Company Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., 2. Punjab and Sind Bank and Ors.. Supreme Court
|Case Number:||Civil Appeal No. 8443 of 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 24745 of 2007) and Civil Appeal No. 8444 of 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 3373 of 2008)|
|Party Name:||1. Punjab and Sind Bank, 2. Allied Beverage Company Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs 1. Allied Beverage Company Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., 2. Punjab and Sind Bank and Ors.|
|Counsel:||For Appellant: Rajiv Dutta, Sr. Adv., Kumar Dushyant Singh, R. Nedumaran, Deepak Bhattacharya, Rajesh Kumar, Priyanka Kumari, Satish Aggarwal, Gurbir Singh Raikhy and Surya Kant, Advs.|
|Judges:||P. Sathasivam and B.S. Chauhan, JJ.|
|Issue:||Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - Section 19(20); Usurious Loans Act, 1918; Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970; Banking Regulation Act, 1949 - Sections 21, 21A and 35A; ...|
|Citation:|| 159 CompCas 474 (SC),  104 SCL 283 (SC), 2010 (9) UJ 4594 (SC)|
|Judgement Date:||October 01, 2010|
P. Sathasivam, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 24.08.2007 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 6069 of 2007 wherein the Division Bench of the High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by M/s Allied Beverage Company Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") modifying the order dated 09.06.2005 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the DRT") in Original Application No. 47 of 2003 preferred by the Punjab & Sind Bank (hereinafter referred to as "the Bank") to the extent by reducing the pendente lite and future interest w.e.f. 04.07.2003 to 14% p.a. with annual rests, which would be the simple interest, against the rate of interest @ 18% p.a. with monthly rests, awarded by the DRT, Delhi.
3. Brief facts:
(a) Vide application dated 28.04.1997, the Company approached the Bank and requested for grant of financial facilities in its name. After verifying the documents submitted by the Company, the Bank acceded to the request and granted the Cash Credit (CC) (Hypothecation) limit to the tune of Rs. 60,00,000/-, Term Loan of Rs. 20,00,000/-, FOBLC/FOBP facility to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- and Import/Inland Letter of Credit facility to the tune of Rs. 25,00,000/-. However, the Cash Credit and the Import/Inland Letter of Credit limit was not to exceed Rs. 60,00,000/-. The aforesaid credit facilities given by the Bank were duly secured by way of hypothecation over stock of raw materials, finished products, goods in transit and in process, finished goods, generator sets and tanks on which the first charge has been created by the Haryana Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation") and the Bank had the second charge over all the above materials. Additionally, the said credit facilities were also secured by way of equitable mortgage by deposit of original Title Deeds in respect of immovable property bearing Plot No. 9, Road No, W-8, DLF Qutab Enclave, Phase-III, village Nathurpur, Teh. and Dist. Gurgaon measuring about 450.78 sq.mts. belonging to Shri Surinder Kumar Sadhu -Director of the Company. On 16.07.1997, the Bank sanctioned and granted the abovementioned loan/credit facilities to the Company. The Company submitted all the required documents with the Bank. Because of certain reasons, the business of the Company suffered a set back and its account with the Bank was declared as Non-performing Assets (NPA) on 31.03.1999. As on that date, an amount of Rs. 60,99,482.77/- was due in Cash credit account and Rs. 15,05,470/- in respect of the Term loan account. The account of the Company was transferred to NPA Account on 01.04.1999.
(b) On 16.09.2002, the Bank sent a legal notice to the Directors of the Company under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short 'the Securitization Act') through its Manager, calling them to regularize the account by paying the outstanding dues payable to the Bank along with interest due thereon and that in failure of the same, the Bank would be constrained to take appropriate legal action under the Securitization Act against them. On receipt of the notice, the Company approached the Bank for settlement of accounts and gave a proposal in writing and also deposited a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- towards token money. However, the settlement could not be materialized as the same was on the lower side and as such the amount of token money was credited to the Company's account.
(c) On 04.07.2003, the Bank filed an application before the DRT being O.A. No. 47 of 2003 for recovery of Rs. 1,47,42,616.77 along with pendente lite and future interest. During the pendency of the application, the Company further gave a proposal for settlement but the same could not be materialized. However, on 09.06.2005, the Presiding Officer allowed the application and directed the Company to pay the outstanding amount with pendente lite and future interest. The Presiding Officer further directed that a Recovery Certificate be prepared and the parties therein should appear before the Recovery Officer-I, DRT-III Delhi on 09.08.2005 for execution of the same. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Presiding Officer, the Company preferred an appeal being Appeal No. 70 of 2006 before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRAT'), Delhi and the same was dismissed vide order dated 29.03.2007.
(d) Challenging the order dated 29.03.2007 passed by the DRAT, the Company preferred Writ Petition (C) No. 6069 of 2007 before the High Court on 10.07.2007. Vide order dated 24.08.2007, the High Court disposed of the writ petition modifying the order in respect of interest to the extent...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL