HARI PRASAD KABRA Vs. DENA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The principal question is when the Debts Recovery Tribunal is seized of this matter and has passed few orders against the complainant, can this Commission interfere in this matter. Does those orders amount to deficiency on the part of the respondent-Bank. Shortly stated, the facts of this case are these. In the year 1999, Dena Bank granted loan to one M/s. Silver star Enterprises, a partnership firm, in the sum of Rs. 7.75 lakh. Mr. Vijay D. Kabra is the Managing Partner of the firm (borrower). Another partner is Mrs. Nirmala V. Kabra. Mr. Vijay D. Kabra had mortgaged his residential flat as collateral security for the said loan. Shri Hari Prasad Kabra, the complainant in this complaint and Shri Avtar Singh stood guarantors for the said loan. It is alleged that Shri Avtar Singh and the complainant themselves signed the blank documents. Mr. Avtar Singh executed a letter of undertaking on stamp paper of Rs. 50 in favour of the Bank, whereby the said Avtar Singh declared, agreed, undertook and confirmed inter alia that he is the Co-borrower and guarantor and responsible jointly for payment of loans sanctioned by the Bank.

(2.) According to the complainant, on 9.7.2002, Mr. Vijay D. Kabra wrote a letter to the Bank and informed the Bank that two flats of the said Co-borrower-cum-Guarantor were previously mortgaged with G.S.F.C. as collateral securities but now those two flats were lying idle with G.S.F.C. because the liabilities of the G.S.F.C. stood cleared. The borrower called upon the Bank to take proper steps to take the possession of the said additional two flats, sell those and adjust their sale proceedings in its loan accounts. It appears that the bank did not pay heed to the said request because obviously those flats were not mortgaged with the Bank.

(3.) Ultimately, the Bank filed a case before Hon'ble Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai. The Bank claimed a sum of Rs. 14,26,484 plus interest @ 16.83 %. On 2.4.2009, the DRT allowed a claim of Rs. 14,26,484 with interest @ 12% instead of 16.53%. Thereafter, recovery proceedings are still pending. Recovery Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal-II Mumbai sent a copy of Recovery Certificate to the DRT-II, Ahmedabad for sale of mortgaged flat of the borrower. The Bank also sent a letter to the complainant society calling upon the society not to allow sale or transfer of the said flat without permission of the Bank.