IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY
TRIBUNAL SILIGURI
PCM
Tower, 2nd Floor, 2 no. Mile, Sevoke Road, Siliguri - 734001.
I.A. no.
___________OF 2023
in
SARFAESI APPLICATION
NO 26 OF 2022
{ Diary no. 256/2021
}
HASNA BEWA
--- ---- APPLICANT
– VERSUS –
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
----- ---- RESPONDENT
The
humble petition of the above named applicant, most respectfully;
Sheweth as under :
1.
That
the above referred application has been placed in sub section (1) of Section 17
of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act’ 2002, and being challenging the respondent notice for
Recovery of the Loan facility bearing Account No. 0700250032294, and Notice
Under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002, being possession notice under
rule 8 (1), dated 05-11-2021.
2.
That
the Defendant has served notice of intended Sale being no. CO SASTRA
MURS/EAUCTION/999/2021, dated 21-01-2022, Up-on the applicant which has been
posted on 28-01-2022, vide Consignment no. EW361395319IN, which reached to the
applicant on 29-01-2022, and at the same time they have published E-Auction
Sale Notice in the News Paper dated 22-01-2022, whereby it has been mentioned
that mortgaged property of the applicant will be sold out through E-auction on
22-02-2022. It is surprising that in-spite of having knowledge of Criminal
Conspiracy and activities of the Bank Officials in looting money from the
applicant, the mortgaged property is going to be put on sale.
3.
That
the concerned respondent is showing four loan accounts vide account nos.
0700250032294, 0700306740359, 0700306742490, and 0700306734640; but in fact 0700306734640 and 0700250032294,
exist and the other two loan accounts have no existence. As such the facts of
the case and conduct of the concerned bank are required to be investigated
first and the bank should inform the applicant the details of the loan amount
disbursed to the applicant. Before doing that they cannot go for E-AUCTION of
the mortgaged property.
4.
That
the applicant through her Learned Advocate by Email communication to the
defendant requested to stay off their hand till out-come of the investigation
regarding cheating and conspiracy of bank officials, as mentioned in the
complaint dated 20-12-2021.
5.
That
after death of husband of your applicant in 2000, she faced a lot of problems
including financial issues. To run her family she decided to start a business
in 2011-12; but she had no sufficient money. So, She contacted with the then
Branch Manager, namely one Mr. Sunder of United Bank of India, now Punjab
National Bank, Nimtatla Chunakhali Branch, Beharampore, Murshidabad, for
getting Loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- . The said Mr. Sunder sanctioned to start and
run her business. She availed of that Loan and the same was repaid in time.
6.
That
your applicant further decided to enhance her business for which money was
required. So She again approached the Branch Manager, who ultimately sanctioned
further Loan of Rs. 5,00,000/-. She again repaid the said Loan in time.
Therefore from time to time on three occasions She had taken Loan from Bank for
doing her business and She repaid the entire Loan Amount with interest in time.
In the mean-time new manager one Mr. Mahindra came to the Branch of the said
Bank. Then the manager was again changed. One Mr. Koushik took the charge. She
approached him for extending a Loan to the tune of Rs. 7,00,000/- to run
smoothly the business of “Rana Raja Bastralay”. It was given. By that time the
manager was again changed. One Mr. Prakash Shrivastava took the charge.
7.
That
your applicant expressed her desire to the Branch Manager to start a new
business for which a Loan of Rs. 40,00,000/- was required. But at that time She
had existing three Loan accounts. To close down the said accounts, a sum
approximately of Rs. 12,00,000/- was necessary. The said manager dissuaded to
repay the said sum of Rs. 12,00,000/- from the new Loan of Rs. 40,00,000/- .
your applicant agreed. He asked her to issue three cheques amounting to total
12 Lakhs. Your applicant issued the same and the manager assured her of closing
the said three loan accounts. The manger further told your applicant that She
would receive a cheque within a four days, and to contact him immediately after
receiving the same. Accordingly, your applicant received the cheque by post and
immediately contacted him. Subsequently the said Mr. Shrivastava joined RM
Office. In-spite of receiving your applicant’s three cheques the Loan Amount
was not repaid. In the mean-time your applicant contacted with Mr. Arun Babu,
the Assistant Manager and told him the fact. After hearing her trouble he asked
the concern Manager Mr. Shrivastava to whom your applicant submitted three
cheques, to close down the said accounts immediately. Accordingly your
applicant’s said three Loan accounts were closed.
8.
That
in availing the said Loan, Your applicant had to mortgage the Title Deed of one
of her Properties. In-spite of repeated request and in-spite of the payment of
the Loan Amount the bank authority has not returned the title deed. It is still
lying with the Bank. The said Mr. Shrivastava also told your applicant not to
disclose the fact that He have not been given the Deed to Mr. Sunder, Arun
Babu, and Cashier Khokan Babu.
9.
That
said Mr. Shrivastav in mean time came to residence of your applicant and asked
for Rs. 3,00,000/- immediately to treat his ailing father and further assured
her of depositing the same in her Loan Account. This is the incident of 2020.
Relying his words and considering his immediate need She gave him Rs. 3 Lakhs
by Cash. The said Mr. Shrivastav after a few days again came to residence of
your applicant and asked for money to save another Customer of the Bank whose
account has been declared as NPA. He immediately opened TOD and transferred Rs.
8 Lakhs in your applicant’s Account and then took that money for saving the
said customer. He further promised to deposit the previous Rs. 3 Lakhs and
present Rs. 8 Lakhs in your applicant’s Loan Account. But he has not kept his
promise. The said Mr. Shrivastav again came to your applicant’s house and asked
for Rs. 2 Lakhs in lieu of opening a Loan Account having subsidy facility. She
paid him Rs. 50,000/- by cash and Rs. 1,50,000/- by cheque. The said Mr.
Shrivastav has not given her certificate against her Gold Bond of 12 gm. Gold
for which Rs. 60,000/- was given.
10. That said Mr.
Shrivastav has neither returned your applicant’s money to the tune of Rs.
15,00,000/- nor has he deposited the same in her loan account. He also has not
handed over her Mediclaim Certificate for which She paid him Rs. 16,000/-.
Beside key of the hardware shop room of one Mr. Jagadish Mondal has also not
been handed over to her. He took the names of surajit, and sekhar of the bank
who would solve her problem. The said Arun Babu of the bank in two parts took
Rs. 14 Lakhs from your applicant against booking of a flat. Neither any
agreement for sale has been prepared nor money, has been returned. Arun babu
has also cheated your applicant.
11. That
surprisingly the Bank authority which has now been merged with Punjab National
Bank has published in “Financial Express” as well as Bengali vernacular “Ekdin”
on their Edition on 10-11-2021, Possession Notice, in respect of the same
property. In one place they have shown total outstanding as Rs. 69,27,691.87/-
and in another place the outstanding has been shown as Rs. 18,83,206.87/-;
12. That your
applicant has been shown a defaulter but in reality She never have been
provided with the alleged Loan Amount. It is a conspiracy of the Bank
Officials, for which She has been impleaded as a party to the issue.
13. That the bank
officials have sanctioned & withdrawn Rs. 4 Lakhs which has been given for
survival during the pandemic from account no. 0700306740359. Besides your
applicant have no idea about the account number 0700306742490, where Rs. 2.81 lakhs
have been shown. Who has sanctioned and who has taken money, your applicant
cannot tell.
14. That your
applicant lodge such facts with the concerned Police Authority as well as the
Bank Authority seeking thereby investigation into the matter of her complaint
and to book the culprit being bank officials. Your applicant is victim who has
been defrauded by bank officials.
15. Pursuant to
grant of loan facility vide sanction letter dated 01/08/2018 by the Respondent
to and in favour of your applicant. The
respondent took mortgaged of her one of the property. Full description of the
said ownership property of the Applicant particularly described in a Schedule
at the foot hereof and marked as Schedule “A”. It is pertinent to
states that the Loan Account no. 0700250032294, has been assigned by the
Defendant.
16. The Borrower
being your applicant regularly paid to the Respondent, and whereas the said EMI
directly taken by the Respondent Bank, through ECS from the account of the
borrower. Borrower did not default in paying her EMI as assigned by the
respondent bank.
17. That in the month of April’ 2021, the respondent bank through its Letter
dated 09-04-2021, sent Recovery notice stating inter alia your borrower as a
defaulter and call upon your applicant for payment of Rs. 49,24,927/- ( Rupees Forty
Nine Lakhs and Twenty Four Thousand and Nine Hundred Twenty Seven ) only,
categorize such Loan account as NPA ( Nonperforming account) on 31-03-2021, and
thereby threatened to initiate Legal proceeding against your applicant.
18. That the Reserve Bank of India on 27-03-2020, issued Statement of
Development and Regulatory Policies where inter alia certain regulatory
measures were announced to mitigate the burden of debt servicing brought about
by disruptions on account of COVID-19 pandemic and to ensure the continuity of
financial assertions, which extended time and again, by the RBI.
19. That the
Reserve Bank of India has issued such notification for the moratorium period at
first for the three months commencing from the month of March’ 2020, April’
2020, and May’ 2020, and consequently for another three months i.e. June’ 2020,
July’ 2020, and August’ 2020. Thus a total period of Six months has been given
as moratorium period were announced to mitigate the burden of debt servicing
brought about by disruptions on account of COVID-19 pandemic and to ensure the
continuity of financial assertions, which extended time and again, by the RBI.
20. The Applicant
astonished while She received a notice on or about 05/11/2021 at the door of
her residence wherein it was purportedly contended that one alleged notice
dated 02-07-2021 by the Respondent purportedly under sub-Section 2 of Section
13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement
of Securities Interest Act; 2002, calling upon the Applicant to discharge in
full a total sum of Rs.69,27,691.87/- ( Rupees Sixty Nine Lakhs Twenty Seven
Thousand Six Hundred Ninety One and paise eighty seven ) only, was allegedly
served upon the Applicant.
21. That the applicant states
and submit that Loan Amount under Loan account 0700306740359, and
0700306742490, were sanctioned but the Bank Officials have siphoned money from
the applicant on different pretext. The applicant has already informed the
concerned Bank Authority about taking away her money by some officers, but
those allegations have not been investigated. As such the said sale notice is
an outcome of a malafide intention and conduct.
22. That the applicant
states and submit that what amount the applicant received as Loan, She has
already repaid the same. As such the applicant does not owe to the bank.
Therefore the impugned Sale notice does not stand in the eye of law and it is
an attempt of defendant to gain uncalled for money from the applicant.
23. That the applicant states
and submits that the concern Bank is not certain about the loan amount as they
have claimed 69,27,691.87, and odd from the applicant which includes Rs. 18,83,206.87, arising out of loan
account no. 0700306734640, it is surprising
that the concerned respondent has published Sale notices of the mortgaged
property due to non-payment of Loan amount arising out of Loan account nos. 0700306734640 and
0700250032294, respectively. The said
two loan accounts cannot be merged.
24. That the
applicant states and submits that the defendant has declared the properties
being the residential building as non-performing assets. But an asset is always
appreciated not depreciated. Therefore definition of NPA is illusory and vague.
On this context the Secured Asset always gives Protection to the Bank.
Therefore the defendant should not be worried about payment of the Loan Amount
specially when the defendant’s officials siphoned Loan Money and taken payment
of the Loan Amount in the manner as stated herein above.
25. That the applicant
states and submits that the applicant does not evade to carry on her burden and
responsibility. It is only because of the looting money by Bank’s Officials in
Pandemic Situation when the entire world has to come to a stand-still, the
applicant has become a defaulter. Up-to pandemic, the applicant never default
in paying her monthly installment.
26. That the
Applicant states that the Defendants are deliberately trying to encroach the
properties so that they can earn an added advantage over it as they have
suppressed many material facts and even disobeyed the laws as enumerated in the
‘said Act’; such transpires from their performances which are being foreseen
herein above with facts and evidence such illegal, concocted steps must
categorically be directed for the ends of natural justice, furthermore no such
arrogant, biased and disobedient steps be barred from taking into consideration
by the Defendants as there is law above everyone.
27. That the
applicant further submits that the purported steps and measures taken by the
defendant against the applicant are full of undue haste and ill motive without
applicability of the provisions as enumerated under the SERFESAI Act. The
applicant craves to make appropriate submission on facts and law at the time of
hearing.
28. That the
applicant further pray that the illegal steps taken by the defendant under the
blanket of the SERRFESAI Act and rules made thereunder are bad in law and thus
it must be set aside and or quashed forthwith and status quo be maintained over
the mortgaged property till the adjudication of this Lis, as the action of the
defendants are ambiguous contrary to the settled provisions of the Law and
procedure and or not in accordance with the were settled and established law
and rules.
29. That the
defendant did not follow the process of service as lay down by the provisions.
This action of the defendant bank clearly shows the desperation of theirs to
recover the money from the borrowers by any means possible. That the applicant
submits that this kind of desperate actions by a financial institution like the
defendant bank is very shameful as they are in as such higher position of power
and plays a very important role in the daily life of the public they serve.
30. That the
applicant hereby prays that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to pass an
order quashing the paper publication and Notice of Sale dated- 21-01-2022 and
Notice u/s 13(4) dated- 05.11.2021, as the whole procedure totally based on
negligence of the Bank and only to rectify their own mistakes which clearly
shows the malaise intentions of the banking authority behaving more like a
money lenders from the past days.
31. That in terms of
Order dated 21-12-2022, the applicant was directed to file written notes of
Argument within four weeks. Since IA no. 45 of 2022, is pending before the
Learned Tribunal, so preparing the written notes of argument is difficult to
prepare on the following grounds;
(1) I.A. no. 45 of 2022,
arising out of SA/26/2022, is a very important application for deciding the
issues involved in SA no. 26 of 2022. Specific allegations against the
concerned Branch Manager have been made who syphoned the entire loan amount of
the applicant meaning thereby on paper the applicant is shown a Debtor having
availed of the Loan Amount But in reality She never received the same.
(2) That the Respondent
in-spite of specific allegation against their own officer, have not taken any
step. The applicant even has never been asked to place her case before the
respondent.
(3) The petitioner has
also made an application before the concerned Police Station, who in cahoots
with the respondent have not proceeded.
(4) That the specific
allegations unless and until are redressed by the concerned authorities, it
will be difficult for the Learned Tribunal to take the matter to a logical
conclusion.
(5) I.A. no. 45 of 2022,
arising out of SA/26/2022, is still pending to decide on its merit. The
respondent did not answer anything till date. Order dated 21/02/2022, clearly
shows such fact which require to be finalize, in the interest of administration
of Justice.
Server Copy of Order dated 21-12-2022,
and Order dated 21-02-2022, are enclosing herewith and marked as Annexure –
“A”.
32. That the applicant hereby seeks that the present
application may be disposed off by directing the respondent to submit a report
dealing with specific allegations made by the applicant on the mischief of the
bank officials who have defrauded the applicant, and which are detailed in IA
no. 45 of 2022, as well as in SA no. 26 of 2022, in the interest of
administration of Justice.
33. That unless
the order/orders prayed by the applicant is passed by the Ld. Tribunal the
applicant herein will suffer from the wrong doing of the defendant bank herein.
34. That this
interim application is made bona fide and for the end of justice.
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed as
follows:-
a.
The
present application may be disposed of by directing the respondent/ defendant
to submit a report dealing with specific allegations made by the applicant on
the mischief of the bank officials who have defrauded the applicant, and which
are detailed in IA no. 45 of 2022, as well as in SA no. 26 of 2022;
b.
Such
or other order may kindly also be passed as deemed fit and proper in the fact
and circumstances of this case.
And for this act of kindness your
petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.
SCHEDULE “A” ABOVE REFERRED TO
Description
of immovable property;
ALL
that
piece and parcel of the immovable property being at Mouza : Jan-Mahammadpur,
J.L. no. 112, L.R. Khatian No. 2417, L.R. Dag no. 2503, measuring 3.50 decimal
alongwith construction of Two storied building standing thereon within the
limits of Hatinagar Gram Panchayat, Post Office – Ghorsala, Police Station –
Raghunathganj, District – Murshidabad, Pin - 742102, West Bengal, bounded by :
On the North : Road
On
the South : House of
Rasimuddin Mondal,
On the East : House of Marjina Bibi,
On the West : Bapi Sk.
AFFIDAVIT
I, Hasna Bewa, Wife of Late Janaruddin
Seikh, aged about 51 years, by faith Muslim, by Occupation Business, residing
at premises being Village – Ustia, Post Office – Muktinagar, Police Station –
Berahampore, District – Murshidabad, Pin – 742102, West Bengal, do here by
solemnly affirm and declare as follows:-
1.
That
I am the Applicant in the above case and I am well acquainted with the facts of
the suit and I am competent to swear this Affidavit for and on behalf of the
Applicant.
2.
That
the statements made above in paragraphs are true to my knowledge as derived
from the records.
That the rest are my humble
submissions to the Hon’ble Debt Recovery Tribunal and I sign this Affidavit on
the ____ day of March’ 2023.
Signature
Identified by me
Advocate
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated
: ____day of March’ 2023.
Place
: Kolkata.
N O T A R Y
No comments:
Post a Comment