STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. PAWAN MALHOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THEY are heard. The present Appeal is preferred under Section 20 of the R.D.D.B.F.I. Act, 1993 challenging the order passed by the D.R.T. on 30th May, 2013. By this order the Tribunal has dismissed the Original Application preferred by the Appellant -Bank, holding it to be barred by time. The relevant facts for adjudication of the present case are that all the defendants were proceeded ex parte by the Tribunal as they did not appear. The Bank filed the Original Application for recovery of its dues for a sum of Rs. 18,29,565/ - together with interest, cost and other reliefs. It was the housing term loan which was sanctioned by the Bank and the relevant documents relating to the loan transaction were executed on 19th March, 2002. Thereafter, the defendants before the Tribunal deposited the amount with the Bank on 16th May, 2002, 29th June, 2002, 11th July, 2002, 10th August, 2002 and the last deposit towards the E.M.I. was made on 14th February, 2004. Thereafter, no amount was ever deposited by the defendants. Since, there was default committed by the defendants in not paying the dues in form of the E.M.Is., therefore, the Bank declared the account as N.P.A. on 31st July, 2005. A legal notice was issued to the defendants on 6th September, 2011 by the Bank demanding the payment, and the Original Application was filed in the year 2012.

(2.) IN the present case, there was no mortgage, therefore, the period of limitation would be of three years and not of twelve years. By virtue of Article 62 of the Limitation Act, 1953 which provides for recovery of debts through a mortgaged property, the period of limitation of twelve years is prescribed.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the last payment was made by the defendants on 14th February, 2004 and thereafter, no payment was made. As stated earlier, because of non -deposit of the E.M.Is. the account was declared as N.P.A. on 31st July, 2005 and thereafter, the legal notice was given to the defendants by the Bank on 6th September, 2011. Since the last payment was made by the defendants on 14th February, 2004, therefore, that would be the crucial date for the purposes of ascertaining the limitation.