Legal Question in Banking Law in India

DRT verdit in case i found: the bank did not maintain the accounts properly

in the loan account and there is no explanation from

the bank so far as maintaining of the acount is concernred

and it is clear in all the bank cases and the account copy

will fasten the liability but in this case the account copy

itself is incorrect and people will believe the account copy

of the bank and this account copy seems to be totally

incorrect inview of the several pay slips filed

by the defendents which are marked

as EX B13 to EX B18 containing many books.

In these CIRCUMSTANCES THEACCOUNT COPY

CANNOT BE BELIVED AND THEREFORE THE OAhas to be

allowed only for the amount of Rs. 1128685/- with simple interest 6%pa.,

from the date of OA till realisation.

This recovery certificate is being issued

since it is public money and there is no document

to show how much amount acually due to the applicant bank.

The bank never proved the amount due.

It is the intial burden on the bank according to the

Evidence Act Sec 101 to 103 and the intial burden is not

discharged by the bank.

Therefore, the bank cannot base on the demerits

of the defendents case

How the defendents cameout fromthe clutches of bank? They win the case DRAT?

Surprising banks if not prpoerly maintain how the coustmer saved? customer is GOD to the bank, but now no bank feels the same, moreover behaves and using abusing language. NPA became more fraud and it became GOLDMINE to the bank officials

The party submitted the account through an CA and moreover party paid excess of Rs.4 lakhs. The bank manager in his cross accepted that the bank failed to credit some amounts tothe account. The fixed deposits Rs.1.25 lakhs not credited to theaccount and states there is no record. FDRs no."s,amount,dated stated the defendents. Those are pledged tobank. The bank states orginal account book misplaced/not found/lost. Typed a/c copy produced. So many credit vouchers not reflected in the account. So how far DRAT help tothe defendents? possible

Also the bank financed and account inthe name of ALT (ITS name of the building)but the mortaged property inthe name SKT. Suit filed inthe name of ALT. VALID?

Bank auctioned the property but DRAT STAYED TO CONFIRM THE AUCTION BIDDER. In the meantime before confirm AUCTION if the defendents paid the entire due AUCTION canelled? The defendents have right ontheir property?

2) The property worth Rs. 6 crores Due to bank amount Rs. 22lakhs. Can bank auctioned the entire property? OR the bank auctioned to their extent of debt? AS

per AIR1997SC2106 i heard verdit as the bank have right to auction to the extent of their debt, not the entire property? Is it correct? PLS waiting your valuable replies and suggestions and citations if any

IF THE DEFTDS.NOT PAID DEBT(debt is disputed and contraversial), THE BANK AUCTIONED THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OR TOTHE EXTENT OF THEIR DEBT? IF THEY AUCTIONED THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THEN WHAT REMEDY TO THE DEFENDENTS? PLS CLARIFY

judgment of the Orissa High Court Division Bench in Swastik Agency Vs State Bank of India reported in 2009 Volume 1 Debt Recovery Tribunal Cases page 520 (Ori) which contains almost all the supreme court judgments on the issue.Some important judgement which would help

AIR 2000 SC 2346

2008 (9) SCC 284

2008(9) SCC 299

the above judgements applicable and useful to the defts? If anymore citations may pls refer

THANQ

1 Answer from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Banking Law questions and answers in India

Looking for something else?