IN
THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL III,
KOLKATA
JEEVAN SUDHA BUILDING (8th FLOOR)
42C, J.L. NEHRU ROAD
KOLKATA – 700 071
IA
NO. ______________Of 2024
(Diary
No. ______________of 2024)
Arising
out of
SARFAESI
APPLICATION NO. 627 OF 2024
(Diary
No. 1210 of 2024)
In the
matter of;
1.
M/s. Global Aqua, a proprietorship
firm having its registered office at Premises being no. 44/1A, Shyamnagar Road,
Police Station Dum Dum, Kolkata – 700055, District – North 24 Parganas.
2.
Jayanta Chowdhury, proprietor of M/s. Global
Aqua, Son of Late Ajay Chowdhury, having Office and residence at Premises being
no. 44/1A, Shyamnagar Road, Police Station – Dum Dum, Kolkata – 700055,
District North 24 Parganas.
---
---- PETITIONERS
–
VERSUS –
1.
Canara Bank, Chowringhee Branch, having
its Office address as Premises being no. 7, Kyd Street, Police Station – Park
Street, Kolkata – 700016.
2.
Authorised Officer, Canara Bank,
Chowringhee Branch, having its Office address as Premises being no. 7, Kyd
Street, Police Station – Park Street, Kolkata – 700016.
-----
---- RESPONDENTS
AN
APPLICATION FOR FORENSIC AUDIT OF LOAN & ACCOUNTS;
The humble petition of the above named
Petitioners, most respectfully;
Sheweth as under :
1. That
the above referred application has been placed under sub section (1) of Section
17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement
of Security Interest Act’ 2002, and the challenge is the Possession Notice
dated 03-07-2024, under Rule 8 (1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement)
Rules, 2002, in respect of the Immovable Property categorized as Primary
Security and Collateral Security, wherein the Primary Security is in respect of
the Industrial Land as described and the Collateral Securities are the
residential occupation, and thereby asked to pay Rs. 11,51,75,616.12/- (Rupees
Eleven Crore Fifty One Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Six Hundred Sixteen and
paise twelve) only, within Sixty days. A copy of the said notice was pasted on
the wall of the premise of the petitioner. The said possession notice issued by
the concerned respondent bank is arising out of the Notice dated 28/03/2023,
under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002.
Photostat
Copies of the Possession Notice dated 03-07-2024, under Rule 8 (1) of the
Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, and Notice dated 28/03/2023, under
Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002, are annexed herewith and marked as
Annexure – “A” Collectively.
2. That
the applicant is the proprietor of the Proprietorship Firm under the name and
style of M/s. Global Aqua and is engaged in the business of processing,
trading, and exports of fish and fishery products. Pertinently, the applicant
availed credit facilities since the month of November’ 2016, in the nature of
MSME Sahay, Car Loan, and Packing Credits, from the Respondent Bank, wherein
the applicant paid in full, the said MSME Sahay Loan of Rs. 60 Lakhs, & Car
Loan of Rs. 10 Lakhs, in terms prescribed by the Respondent Bank. The Term Loan
has been continuing in terms of the repayment prescribed by the Respondent
Bank.
3. That
the said Term Loan being No. 0145766000027, has been sanctioned by the
Respondent Bank considering the Credit worthiness of the Petitioner, on
27-12-2017, for a sum of Rs. 8,90,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Crore Ninety Lakhs)
only, which the petitioner had been paying continuously to the respondent bank
which commenced as per instructions of the respondent bank on 27/01/2018. The
petitioner has paid a sum of Rs. 1,83,52,560/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Three
Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand and Five Hundred Sixty) only, as on 31/03/2020, Rs.
1,17,01,000/- (Rupees One Crore Seventeen Lakhs and One Thousand) only, as on
31/03/2021, Rs. 2,85,68,864/- (Rupees Two Crore Eighty Five Lakhs Sixty Eight
Thousand and Eight Hundred Sixty Four) only, as on 31-03-2022, Rs.
2,23,42,230/- (Rupees Two Crore Twenty Three Lakhs Forty Two Thousand and Two
Hundred Thirty) only, as on 31-03-2023, and Rs. 2,13,46,875/- (Rupees Two Crore
Thirteen Lakhs Forty Six Thousand and Eight Hundred Seventy Five) only, as on
31-03-2024, therefore the total sum of repayment is Rs. 10,23,11,529/- (Rupees
Ten Crore Twenty Three Lakhs Eleven Thousand and Five Hundred Twenty Nine)
only, made by the Petitioner to the Respondent Bank as on 31-03-2024. The terms
of the repayment by the Petitioner showed his credit worthiness and good
concise in making repayment to the respondent bank.
Photostat
Copy of the Term Loan Statements are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure –
“B” Collectively.
4. That the Reserve
Bank of India (RBI) implemented a moratorium on loan payments from March 1 to
August 31, 2020 to help the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic. On 24 March 2020,
the Government of India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi ordered a
nationwide Lockdown for 21 days, limiting
movement of the entire 1.3 billion population
of India as a preventive measure against
the COVID-19
pandemic in India. It was ordered after a 14-hour voluntary public
curfew on 22 March, followed by enforcement of a
series of regulations in the country's COVID-19 affected regions. The
lockdown was placed when the number of confirmed positive corona virus cases in
India was approximately 500. Observers stated that the lockdown had slowed
the growth rate of the pandemic by 6 April to a
rate of doubling every six days, and by 18 April,
to a rate of doubling every eight days. As the end of the first lockdown period
approached, state governments and other advisory committees recommended
extending the lockdown. The governments of Odisha and Punjab extended the state lockdowns to 1
May. Maharashtra, Karnataka, West Bengal and Telangana followed suit.
Photostat copies of
RBI circular dated 27-03-2020, and the Regulatory Statement, are annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure – “C” Collectively.
5.
That on 14 April,
Prime Minister Narendra Modi extended the nationwide lockdown until 3 May, with a conditional relaxations, after 20 April for the regions where the spread had been
contained or was minimal. On 1 May, the Government of
India extended the nationwide lockdown further by two weeks until 17 May. The Government divided all the districts into
three zones based on the spread of the virus—green, red and orange—with
relaxations applied accordingly. On 17 May, the lockdown was further
extended till 31 May by the National Disaster Management Authority.
6.
That
on 30 May, it was announced that lockdown restrictions were to be lifted from
then onwards, while the ongoing lockdown would be further extended till 30 June
for only the containment zones. Services would be resumed in a phased manner
starting from 8 June. It was termed as "Unlock 1.0". Modi later
clarified that the lockdown phase in the country was over and that 'unlock' had
already begun.
7.
That
the second phase of unlock, Unlock 2.0, was announced for the period of 1 to 31
July, with more ease in restrictions. Unlock 3.0 was announced for August.
Similarly, Unlock 4.0 was announced for September and Unlock 5.0 for the
month of October. In the same way, Unlock 6.0 was announced for the month
of November, Unlock 7.0 was announced for the month of December, Unlock
8.0 was announced for the month of January, and Unlock 9.0 was announced for
the month of February.
8.
That the GECL is a loan for which 100%
guarantee would be provided by National Credit Guarantee Trustee Company
(NCGTC) and which will be extended in the form of additional working capital term
loan facility to eligible MSMEs/ Business Enterprises and interested Pradhan
Mantri Mudra Yojana (PMMY) borrowers. The loan tenure is
six years from the date of the first disbursement, including a two-year
moratorium period. The interest rate is 1 year MCLR plus 0.60% per annum,
or MSME - RLLR plus 0.60% per annum. The maximum interest rate is 9.25%
per annum. There is no pre-payment penalty if the loan is repaid
early. The account can be operated in combination with applicable interest
subvention schemes. The primary assets are those created out of the credit
facility. The GECL has been surfaced during the Covid-19 period pursuing
the financial situation in the Pandemic by the Government of India. In the
instant case in hand the Respondent Bank on due intervention of the Government
of India, has given sanctioned of Working Capital Term Loan under GECL Scheme
vide Ref. No. 0145/111/2020-21, dated 22.09.2020, for a sum of Rs. 160 Lakhs
(Rupees One Hundred Sixty Lakhs) only, to build up current assets, to meet
operational liabilities and restart the business activity of Processing,
Trading and Exports of Fish and Marine Products of the Petitioner. The Tenure
of the said GECL is for 48 months, by giving 12 months moratorium on surfacing
the 7.50% rate of interest thereon, wherein the Primary Security assets created
out of the existing credit facility permitted. The Petitioner did not apply for
such GECL credit facility. The Respondent Bank suo-moto has driven such
financial facility to the Petitioner, considering his creditworthiness. The
Petitioner obliged in making the repayment to the said GECL Financial facility
to the respondent bank. The Petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 3,39,774/- (Rupees
Three Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand and Seven Hundred Seventy Four) only, as on
31-03-2021, Rs. 28,59,000/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakhs and Fifty Nine Thousand)
only, as on 31-03-2022, Rs. 55,88,896/- (Rupees Fifty Five Lakhs Eighty Eight
Thousand and Eight Hundred Ninety Six) only, as on 31-03-2023, and Rs.
56,73,815/- (Rupees Fifty Six Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand and Eight Hundred
Fifteen) only, as on 31-03-2024, therefore a total sum of Rs. 1,44,61,485/-
(Rupees One Crore Forty Four Lakhs Sixty One Thousand and Four Hundred Eighty
Five) only has been paid by the Petitioner to the Respondent Bank by
31-03-2024. Pertinently, the tenure of the repayment has not yet been expired.
Photostat copy of
the GECL guideline and related notification with the GECL Loan Statements are
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “D” Collectively.
9. That
the Petitioner had availed Packing Credit Limit understand as PC/FDB/FBE, from
the Respondent Bank on 16/03/2016, for a sum of Rs. 200 Lakhs for purchase of
raw material and for other pre-shipment expenses and for
discount/negotiation/purchase of export bills against confirmed orders/ letter
of credit of prime bank, backed by buyer wise policy, the period for repayment
is 90 days, the tenability of the said Packing Credit is one year from the date
of sanction. The Fresh Packing Credit Limit has been given by the Respondent
Bank on 24/11/2017 to the Petitioner upon total payment realization of the
earlier Packing Credit limit, to the limit from 450 Lakhs to Rs. 550 Lakhs. The
Fresh Packing Credit Limit has been given by the Respondent Bank on 22/05/2019
to the Petitioner upon total payment realization of the earlier Packing Credit
limit, to the limit of Rs. 550 Lakhs. The Fresh Packing Credit Limit has been
given by the Respondent Bank on 18/10/2019 to the Petitioner upon total payment
realization of the earlier Packing Credit limit, to the limit 900 Lakhs. The
Fresh Packing Credit Limit has been given by the Respondent Bank on 22/03/2021
to the Petitioner upon total payment realization of the earlier Packing Credit limit,
to the limit of Rs. 600 Lakhs. The Fresh Packing Credit Limit has been given by
the Respondent Bank on 07-09-2022 to the Petitioner upon total payment
realization of the earlier Packing Credit limit, to the limit of Rs. 600 Lakhs.
The Fresh Packing Credit Limit has been given by the Respondent Bank on
29/02/2024 to the Petitioner upon total payment realization of the earlier
Packing Credit limit, to the limit of Rs. 300 Lakhs. The Petitioner has made
the repayment of the Packing Credit Limit time and again in terms prescribed by
the Respondent Bank.
Photostat
copy of the Sanction Memorandums of Packing Credit is annexed herewith and
marked as Annexure “E” Collectively.
Petitioners
crave leave of the Hon’ble Tribunal to produce the Bank Statements in respect
of Current Account Nos. 0145214000007 & 0145201003431, at the time of
hearing of the present application.
10.
That the said Demand Notice dated
28-03-2023, had various errors which include the housing loan and home secure
loan which have never been disbursed to the petitioner. The said demand notice
stated that the Loan accounts of the petitioner as NPA on 22-03-2024, yet the
Demand Notice dated 28-03-2023 was on 28-03-2023. Moreover, The said Demand
Notice dated 28-03-2023, stated that the operation and conduct of financial
assistance or credit facilities had become irregular since October, 2020. If
that allegation is held to be true, the Respondent Bank had sanctioned various
renewals even in 2024. In the case in hand the respondent Bank by a Letter being
Reference No. ROKOL/MSMESULABH/SANC/206A/2023-24, dated 29-02-2024Permitted
renewal with realignment of existing PC/FDB/FBE limit of Rs. 600.00 Lakhs to
PC/FDB/FBE limit of Rs. 300.00 Laks and OCC/ODBD limit of Rs. 300.00 Lakhs, for
a period of one year from the date of sanction. Such discrepancies in an
important demand Notice which is the basis of initiating recourses under the
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act’ 2002, cannot be taken in a casual approaches, so far. As
such said Demand Notice is bad in law for being factually incorrect more
particularly did not disclose the real debt. Furthermore, the said Demand
Notice included the Housing Loan and Home Secure Loan which has never been disbursed
to the Petitioner. Therefore, the amount demanded in the said Demand Notice is
also bad in law and a clear indication of malpractice by the Respondent Bank.
Such unfair trade practices are against the guidelines set forth by the Reserve
Bank of India and as such the Reserve Bank of India had issued notification /
circular being RBI/2024-25/30 DoS.Co.PPG.SEC.1/11.01.005/2024-25, dated
29-04-2024, addressing such issues and had directed the Financial Institutions
to review their practices regarding mode of disbursal of loan, application of
interest and other charges and take corrective action, including system level
changes, as may be necessary, to address the issues highlighted above. The
Respondent Bank had been wary about the non-disbursal of the housing loan, yet
they did not take any corrective measure.
11.
That the Petitioner had deposited Rs.
35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs) only in the month of February, 2024, out
of which Rs. 10,50,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs and Fifty Thousand) only, was
converted into Fixed Deposit whimsically by the Respondent Bank, without
obtaining any consent and knowledge of the Petitioner. If the Respondent Bank
had been fair in its practice and realized the amount towards GECL Loan the
account of the petitioner would not have been consider for NPA, any more. Very
surprisingly, the Respondent Bank had liquidated the said Fixed Deposit of Rs.
10,50,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs and Fifty Thousand) only, on 05/03/2024, and the
same was adjusted towards packing credit loans. Moreover, after the realignment
of the Petitioner’s loan were sanctioned on 29-02-2024. Such unfair trade
practices by the respondent bank can be construed as mala fide and corrupt
which has resulted in undue hardship upon the petitioner.
12.
That the Petitioner had sent an e-mail
dated 22-03-2024 thereby informing the respondent bank regarding its inability
to pay the required GECL and term loan dues and had further requested to
liquidated the Fixed Deposits held with the Respondent Bank towards the payment
of the aforementioned payments. Furthermore, the Petitioner had stated the
financial condition will change in the month of April’ 2024, wherein the
Petitioner will be able to make the payments.
13.
That the Respondent Bank replied to its
e-mail dated 22-03-2024 stating inter alia that the Fixed Deposits lying with
the Respondent Bank are parts of Security for the Loan availed by the
Petitioner and further stated that the Petitioner is required to clear the
overdues otherwise the Petitioner’s account would be classified as a
Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on that day.
Photostat
copies of the Email communications between the Petitioner and the Respondent
Bank are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “F” Collectively.
14.
That the said notice dated 28/03/2023,
under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002, has been suffering from
inherent defects including that on the headings of the Loan Amount allegedly
claimed to have been disbursed to the petitioner. For instance the demand of
payment against Housing Loan is included in the demand notice but the same is a
fictitious loan transaction to burden the petitioner, illegally.
15.
That so long a concrete statement of
account is not prepared showing the actual debt of the petitioner, no notice
demanding payment on the basis of fictitious transaction can be served and
acted upon against any person. In the instant case the dubious stands of the
respondent bank has surfaced; Specially when in-spite of having the specific
knowledge of non disbursement of housing loan to the petitioner they still
stick to their demand. Such arrogance and fraudulent approach of the respondent
bank are surprising and require immediate intervention of the Hon’ble Tribunal.
16.
That the desperation of the respondent
bank is also clearly visible from their conduct in issuing notice under Section
13(8) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002. This conduct itself is an attempt
to throttle the petitioner, so that the respondent bank can behave like a
vulture on the dead body of the petitioner. It is the obligation of the
respondent bank as to why they can claim money from the proposed disbursement
of housing loan, without correction of the mistake of the bank. Further
arrangement to realize, the said amount in itself to fraud and perjury.
17.
That the petitioner states that the
notice under Section 13(8) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002, is totally
misplaced and premature and as such it should be stayed by the Hon’ble
Tribunal.
18.
That the Learned Advocate for the
respondent bank in his Notice dated 07/10/2024, and in his subsequent
Corrigendum dated 19th day of October’ 2024, have enhanced the
demand to the extent of Rs. 12,46,84,542.58 (Rupees Twelve Crore Forty Six
Lakhs Eighty Four Thousand Five Hundred Forty Two and paise Fifty Eight) only. This
has been done even after knowledge about the fictitious transaction prepared by
the bank. The Learned Advocate of the
bank has not take any steps.
Photostat
Copy of the said Notice dated 07/10/2024, and subsequent Corrigendum dated 19th
day of October’ 2024, are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “G”
Collectively.
19.
That the Petitioner states that the
said notice dated 28/03/2023, under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’
2002, has been suffering from inherent defects including that on the headings
of the Loan Amount allegedly claimed to have been disbursed to the petitioner.
For instance the demand of payment against Housing Loan is included in the
demand notice but the same is a fictitious loan transaction to burden the
petitioner, illegally.
20.
That the Petitioner states that Housing
Loan has never been disbursed even after sanctioned by the Respondent Bank. No
money on account of Housing Loan No.
160001872780, has ever been given to the Petitioner or to the Developer
favouring to the Petitioner in Purchasing the Flat in terms of registered
Agreement for sale dated 21/10/2021, registered in Book No. I, Volume No:
1904-2021, Page No: 545024 to 545075, Being No. 190411911/2021, registered in
the office of the A.R.A. - IV KOLKATA. Surprisingly, the Respondent bank had
taken the EMIs from the Petitioner, deducting the amount on their own without
any consent or intimation to the Petitioner. The Petitioner is astonished in coming
to the knowledge of such fact which surfaced in the purported notice
dated 28/03/2023, under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002, and on
subsequent recourses adopted by the Respondent Bank against the Petitioner. The
Petitioner is not liable to pay any money on account of non-disbursement of
Housing Loan. The Petitioner is entitled to get his money back with appropriate
banking rate of interest thereon which has been deducted and or taken by the
Respondent Bank as alleged illegal EMIs of the said Housing Loan.
Photostat
Copy of the Sanction Memorandum of Housing Loan dated 27-09-2023, is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure – “H”.
21.
That the Petitioner states that the
Petitioner found another Loan Account being Housing Loan Secure Account Number
164003832543, in the said notice dated 28/03/2023, under Section 13(2) of the
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act’ 2002, which has never been applied by the Petitioner and
sanctioned by the Respondent Bank, though a different loan account has been
surfaced at the behest of the Respondent Bank and surprisingly EMIs are being
deducted by the Respondent Bank without any information and consent of the
Petitioner. Therefore the Petitioner is entitled to get his money back with
appropriate banking rate of interest which has been illegally taken by the
Respondent Bank.
22.
That the Petitioner states that Housing
Loan No. 160001872780, and Housing Loan
Secure Account Number 164003832543, are the established cause of fraud by the
Respondent Bank against the Petitioner to ruin his business and to reveal such
truth, the Forensic Audit is required by the independent Auditor upon the
necessary directions of the Hon’ble Tribunal.
23.
That the Petitioner states that
Forensic Audit is necessary to unearth the true states of affaire in giving the
financial facilities by the Respondent Bank as well as in availing the
financial facilities by the Petitioner, herein. More particularly in respect of
Housing Loan No. 160001872780, and
Housing Loan Secure Account Number 164003832543, which are never given or
disbursed by the Respondent Bank to the Petitioner, though the EMIs have been
deducted and taken on such fraudulent fictitious Loan Accounts by the
respondent Bank.
24.
That the Petitioner states that the
said notice dated 28/03/2023, under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’
2002, does not disclose the Real Debts owed by the Respondent Bank against the
Petitioner, herein.
25.
That the Petitioner states that
the said notice dated 28/03/2023, under
Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002, is a fictitious Demand Notice on
the Petitioner. Pertinently no notice of demand has ever been served on the
Petitioner.
26.
That the Petitioner states that the
alleged Primary Security being EMT of Industrial Land at Nawapala P.S. Bagnan,
Block Bagnan under Saratchandra Gram Panchayat, District Howrah, Pin -711303
comrising in RS Plot No. 482, 486, 504, 555, 544, 542, 543, under J.L. No. 25,
together with the factory shed, are the Plot of Land of Agricultural Nature on
the day, the Original Title Deed has been submitted by the Petitioner to Create
the Equatable Mortgage against the Term
Loan Account Number 0145766000027, in the month of December’ 2017. The
Properties are of agricultural nature on the date of creation of the equitable
mortgage to the Respondent Bank, therefore the provisions of the Securitization
and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest
Act’ 2002, is not applicable in respect of the said properties of the
agricultural nature in terms of Section 31(i) of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’
2002.
27.
That the Petitioner states that the
Classification of Loan Accounts as NPA has not been adhered to the RBI Guide line,
as the Respondent Bank has realigned the existing limits of the Loan Account by
the Sanctioned Memorandum dated 29-02-2024, and thereafter on elapse of less
than 30 (thirty) days, on 22-03-2024, the said Loan accounts has been
classified as NPA by the Respondent Bank, which is unbelievable and not
acceptable in the eye of Law. Facts showed the illegality in serving the
alleged purported notice dated 28/03/2023, under Section 13(2) of the
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act’ 2002, on the
Petitioner.
28.
That the Petitioner states that the
Possession Notice under Section 13(4) of the Act, 2002, for immovable property,
dated 03-07-2024, is not in prescribed terms of Rule 8(1) of the Security
Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, the description of the properties has not
been given with the butted and bounded. The agricultural property has been
described therein which is a blocked land. Such encumbrances have not been
disclosed even after having full knowledge.
29.
That the Petitioner states that the
desperation of the respondent bank is also clearly visible from their conduct
in issuing notice under Section 13(8) of the Securitization and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002. This
conduct itself is an attempt to throttle the petitioner, so that the respondent
bank can behave like a vulture on the dead body of the petitioner. It is the
obligation of the respondent bank as to why they can claim money from the proposed
disbursement of housing loan, without correction of the mistake of the bank.
Further arrangement to realize, the said amount in itself to fraud and perjury.
Photostat
copy of the Notice for Exercising the Right under Section 13(8) of the
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act’ 2002, dated 07-10-2024, is annexed herewith and marked
as Annexure – “I”.
30.
That the Petitioner states that the
notice dated 07-10-2024, under Section 13(8) of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’
2002 is a final call of the illegal recourses of the Respondent Bank served on
the petitioner. Such illegal recourses should be nipped in the bud.
31.
That the Petitioner states that the
Respondent Bank in pursuing their illegal recourses headed to published the
E-Auction Sale Notice dated 11-11-2024, in the Bengali daily News Paper
“AAJKAL”, and in an English daily News Paper “Business Standard” on 11th
day of November’ 2024, wherein the statements have no concern with the real
facts, so far. The reserve price stated is not correct one, therein. Such an
attempt of the respondent bank is malign the image of the Petitioner in his
business field. The respondent bank compelling the petitioner by its whimsical
recourses in a much purported manner to
withdraw his business and lost his immovable properties.
Photostat
copy of the E-Auction Sale Notice dated 11-11-2024, in the Bengali daily News
Paper “AAJKAL”, and in an English daily News Paper “Business Standard” on 11th
day of November’ 2024, are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – “J”,
Collectively.
32.
That the Petitioner states that the
enigmatic approach of the respondent bank has created fauxpas to trap him illegally. A nationalized bank is not expected
to get involved in creating such atmosphere which is equivalent to literally
extortion. The Act itself resembles the scheme of vulture accounts more
familiar in the western countries. In the instant case a nationalized bank has
failed the expectation of the billions. As such the Hon’ble Tribunal should
school them accordingly.
33.
That in the given facts and
circumstances, your petitioner seeks to get the direction of the Hon’ble
Tribunal for Forensic Audit by the Independent Auditor in respect of the
Housing Loan No. 160001872780, Housing
Loan Secure Account Number 164003832543, Term Loan Account Number
0145766000027, GECL Account Number 0145755000034, and the Business Finance in
terms of the Packing Credit, as stated herein above with Current Account Number
0145214000007 & 0145201003431 and Saving Account of the Petitioner, lying
with the Respondent Bank, at the Cost of the Petitioner, as to dig out the real
facts of the fictitious Housing Loan No.
160001872780, and Housing Loan Secure Account Number 164003832543, transactions
by the Respondent Bank and willful deliberate creation of the Loan accounts as
NPA without following the procedure & guideline under the prescribed Law
for the time being in force, in the interest of administration of justice.
34.
Unless Orders as prayed for herein are
made the Applicant shall suffer irreparable loss, prejudice and injury thereof.
35.
That this application is made bona fide
and for the end of justice.
It
is therefore, most respectfully prayed as follows:-
a. To appoint an Independent Auditor for Forensic Audit
in respect of the Housing Loan No.
160001872780, Housing Loan Secure Account Number 164003832543, Term Loan
Account Number 0145766000027, GECL Account Number 0145755000034, and the
Business Finance in terms of the Packing Credit, as stated herein above with
Current Account Number 0145214000007 & 0145201003431 and Saving Account of
the Petitioner, lying with the Respondent Bank, at the Cost of the Petitioner,
as to take the note of the irregularities, fictitious transaction in the
Housing Loan and Housing Loan Secure Accounts and the categorization of the
Loan Accounts as NPA, and other irregularities including violation of the RBI
Guidelines, etc., in the interest of
administration of justice;
b. To
restrained the concerned Respondent, its men, agents, servants, officials and
persons claiming under it from giving any effect to or from in any manner
acting in pursuance of the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002, the
illegal possession under said notice dated 07-10-2024, for exercising the right
under Section 13(8) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act’ 2002; and/or any other act or acts of
the Respondent pursuant to laws relating
to Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Securities Interest Act, 2002, and the consequential laws thereto and
thereunder be removed and the Respondent be restrained from selling the SCHEDULE OF SECURED ASSETS /PROPERTIES
property of the Petitioner;
c. To
restraining the concerned Respondent, its men, agents, servants, officials and
persons claiming under it from giving effect to or executing the said notice
dated 28-03-2023 or any other notices consequential thereto, till the disposal
of the present case;
d. An
appropriate order of status-quo till the disposal of this application;
e. For
an exemplary cost may be imposed upon the Respondent Bank;
f. An
appropriate order prohibiting and or quashing the concerned Respondent from
giving or further effect and / or action in furtherance to Possession Notice
dated 03-07-2024, and also restraining them from taking any further steps under
the SARFEASI Act 2002;
g. 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
FOR FORENSIC AUDIT
The Housing Loan No. 160001872780, Housing Loan Secure Account
Number 164003832543, Term Loan Account Number 0145766000027, GECL Account
Number 0145755000034, and the Business Finance in terms of the Packing Credit,
as stated herein above with Current Account Number 0145214000007 &
0145201003431 and Saving Account of the Petitioner, lying with the Respondent
Bank, at the Cost of the Petitioner, as to take the note of the irregularities,
fictitious transaction in the Housing Loan and Housing Loan Secure Accounts and
the categorization of the Loan Accounts as NPA, and other irregularities
including violation of the RBI Guidelines, etc., by the Independent Auditor.
SCHEDULE OF SECURED
ASSETS /PROPERTIES
Description of immovable property
|
Sl. No. |
Description of the Immovable
Securities |
|
1 |
Hypothecation
of Plant & Machinery in the factory. EMT
of Industrial Land at Nawapala P.S. Bagnan, Block Bagnan II under
Saratchandra Gram Panchayat, District Howrah, Pin – 711303, in the name of
Jayanta Chowdhary. R.S.
Plot – 482, 486, 504, 555, 544, 542, 543, J.L. No. 25 EMT
of factory shed/ boundary at Nawapala P.S. Bagnan, Block Bagnan II under
Saratchandra Gram Panchayat, District Howrah, Pin – 711303, in the name of
Jayanta Chowdhary. R.S.
Plot – 482, 486, 504, 555, 544, 542, 543, J.L. No. 25 |
|
2 |
EMT
of property at 2nd Floor in G +2 storied residential building at
Mouza Satganchi, J.L. No. 20, Holding No. 61 Purba Bagan Colony Premises No.
44/1A, Shyamnagar Road, Kolkata – 700055, measuring 1034 Sq. ft. Super Built
Up area and 398 Sq. ft. or roof area in the name of Jayanta Choudhary. Boundaries
as per valuation report : North
: Shyamnagar Road; South
: Property of Mr. Ashoke Saha; East
: 44/1, Shaymnagar Road; West
: 44/2, Shyamnagar Road; |
|
3 |
EMT
of residential flat situated at 3rd floor of partly G+4 storied
building at premises no. DC-9/15, Deshbandhu Nagar, Mouza – Raghunathpur,
J.L. No. 8, RESA No. 134, Touzi No. 3027, R.S. Khatian No. 220, R.S. Dag No.
754, L.R. Dag no. 754, P.O. – Deshbandhunagar, P.S. Baguihati, Kolkata –
700059, District 24 Parganas North, under Rajarhat Gopalpur Municipality in
the name of Jayanta Choudhary. Boundaries
as per valuation Report : North
: 12 ft wide Road; South
: Property of Mr. M.L. Banerjee; East
: P.W.D. Canel; West
: Property of Mr. Sunil Saha; |
– VERIFICATION –
I, Jayanta Chowdhury,
Proprietor of M/s. Global Aqua, being the petitioner, hereby solemnly verify
that the contents of paragraphs 1 to _____ are true to my personal knowledge
and belief and that I have not suppressed any material facts.
I sign this Verification on
this _____day of ___________’ 2024.
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit
of Jayanta
Chowdhury, proprietor of M/s. Global Aqua, Son of Late Ajay Chowdhury, having
Office and residence at Premises being no. 44/1A, Shyamnagar Road, Police
Station – Dum Dum, Kolkata – 700055, District North 24 Parganas, West Bengal.
I,
the above deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1
: That I am the applicant, and thoroughly conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the present case and am competent to swear this affidavit.
2
: That the facts contained in my accompanying petition / application, the
contents of which have not been repeated herein for the sake of brevity may be
read as an integral part of this affidavit and are true and correct to my
knowledge.
DEPONENT
Verification
I,
the above named deponent do hereby solemnly verify that the contents of my
above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, and no part of it is
false and nothing material has been concealed therein.
Verified
this _____ day of ______________’ 2024, at the Kolkata.
DEPONENT
Identified
by me,
Advocate.
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated
: _____day of __________’ 2024.
Place
: Kolkata.
N O T A R Y
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY
TRIBUNAL III, KOLKATA
JEEVAN SUDHA
BUILDING
(8th
FLOOR)
42C, J.L.
NEHRU ROAD
KOLKATA
– 700 071
IA NO.
____________OF 2024
(Diary No.
__________of 2024)
arising out of
SA NO 627 OF 2024
(Diary No. 1210 of
2024)
In the matter of ;
GLOBAL AQUA & ANR.
--- ---- PETITIONERS
– VERSUS –
CANARA BANK & ANR.
----- ---- RESPONDENTS
APPLICATION
FOR
FORENSIC AUDIT
OF
LOAN & ACCOUNTS;
Advocate
on Record;
Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate High Court
Bar Association Room No. 15, High Court Calcutta, Mobile Number : 9883070666,
9836829666, Email : aksinghadvocate@rediffmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment