IN THE ARTHA RIN ADALAT, 3rd COURT AT DHAKA
ARTHA RIN SUIT NO. ___ OF 2005
Arab Bangladesh Bank Limited
Kawran Bazar Branch
BSEC Bhaban
(Gr & 3rd Floor)
102, Kazi Nazrul Islam Avenue
Dhaka-1215
PLAINTIFF
-Versus-
1. Mr. X
Proprietor of
M/S. H Export Import Company & M/S. R Trade International
299/3 Sonargaon Road (1st Floor & 2nd Floor)
Dhaka
And
27/2, Pallabi
Mirpur
Dhaka
2. Mrs. Y
Wife of Mr. K. J. Islam
11/1, Tajmahal Road
P.S. Mohammadpur,
Dhaka
DEFENDANTS
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY BY SALE
OF THE MORTGAGED PROPERTY
SUIT VALUED AT TK. __________________ (__________________________________)ONLY AS ON_____________
The plaintiff above-named most respectfully states as
FOLLOWS:
01. That the plaintiff is a banking company incorporated under the relevant Companies Act. It carries on banking business within the territory of Bangladesh through its various branches including the Kawran Bazar Branch, Dhaka as stated in the cause title (hereinafter referred to as the “plaintiff bank”).
02. That the defendant No.1 is a businessman by his profession and carries on business under the name and style of his proprietorship concern M/S. Sundarban Export Import Company and is the borrower. The defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor and also mortgaged her land securing against the loan availed by the defendant No.1.The defendant’s addresses in the cause title are correct to the best of the plaintiff bank’s knowledge.
03. That in the course of business, the defendant No. 1 opened an account being No. ____________ on _____________ with the plaintiff bank under the name and style of his proprietorship concern M/S. Sundarban Export Import Company. Thereupon at the request of the defendant No.1 plaintiff bank sanctioned Overdraft facility of Tk. 2.22 (Taka two lac twenty two thousand) only in favour of the defendant No. 1 to meet working capital requirements of the defendant No. 1. Subsequently the Overdraft facility was enhanced up to Tk. 11,00,000.00 (Taka eleven lac) only vide Renewal Letter No. KB/S-LTR1/PC1-1658/98 dated 17.09.1998 with a validity up to 03.03.1999, which has been duly accepted by the defendant No.1.
04. That consequent upon another request made by the defendant No.1 vide letter dated 09.05.1999, the plaintiff bank enhanced the Overdraft facility from Tk. 11.00 lac to Tk. 15.00 lac and also sanctioned revolving Bank Guarantee limit of Tk. 2.00 lac in favour of the defendant No. 1 for issuance of Bank Guarantee (Bid bond & PG) to participate in tender and to execute supply/work orders in favour of different Government, Semi-Government and private organizations vide its Sanction Letter, being No. KB/S-ADV/PC4-1290/99 dated 11.07.1999 with a validity up to 30.03.2000.
05. That thereafter at further requests from time to time made by the defendant No. 1, the plaintiff bank sanctioned, renewed, enhanced/re-fixed the following Credit facilities as follows:
| Facilities | Sanction letter | Re-fixation of Amount | Sanction Amount | Validity | |
| From | To | ||||
| Overdraft | KB/S-ADVICE/PC3-2524/99
Dated: 27.12.1999 |
Tk. 15.00 Lac | Tk. 20.00 Lac | Tk.
20.00 Lac |
30.03.2000 |
| Facilities | Sanction letter | Re-fixation of Amount | Sanction Amount | Validity | |
| From | To | ||||
| Overdraft | KB/S-ADV/PC4-052/2000
Dated: 06.01.2000 |
Tk.
20.00 Lac |
Tk.
20.00 Lac |
Tk.
20.00 Lac |
30.03.2001 |
| Overdraft | KB/S-ADV/PC4-1158/2000
Dated: 19.06.2000 |
Tk.
20.00 Lac |
Tk.
12.00 Lac |
Tk.
12.00 Lac |
30.03.2001 |
| BG | KB/S-ADV/PC4-1158/2000
Dated: 19.06.2000 |
—— | —— | Tk.
2.00 Lac |
30.03.2001 |
| Overdraft | KB/S-ADV/PC4-2100/2000
Dated: 19.10.2000 |
Tk.
12.00 Lac |
Tk.
22.00 Lac |
Tk.
22.00 Lac |
30.03.2001 |
| BG | KB/S-ADV/PC4-2100/2000
Dated: 19.10.2000 |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
30.03.2001 |
| Overdraft | KB/S-ADV/PC3-659/01
Dated: 17.02.2001 |
Tk.
22.00 Lac |
Tk.
50.00 Lac |
Tk
50.00 Lac |
10.02.2002 |
| BG | KB/S-ADV/PC3-659/01
Dated: 17.02.2001 |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
10.02.2002 |
| Overdraft | KB/S-LTRI/T-2223/2002
Dated: 09.09.2002 |
Tk.
50.00 Lac |
Tk.
90.00 Lac |
Tk.
90.00 Lac |
31.08.2003 |
| BG | KB/S-LTRI/T-2223/2002
Dated: 09.09.2002 |
Tk.
2.00 Lac |
Tk.
10.00 Lac |
Tk.
10.00 Lac |
31.08.2003 |
06. That the aforesaid all facilities were secured as follow:
a) Registered mortgage of land measuring 2.5 (two point five) kathas situated within District-Dhaka, P.S. Pallabi, Mouza:Senpara Parbata, J.L. No. 220 under Khatian No. 288 (Sabek), 321 (Hal), R.S. Khatian No. 3921, Plot No. 19 vide execution of a registered ‘Deed of Mortgage’, being No.5923 dated 11.10.1999. The property stands in the name of the defendant No.1. The defendant No. 1 also executed a ‘Deed of Agreement for Enhancement of Overdraft Facility’ dated 24.10.2000 covering the enhanced facility of Tk. 22.00 lac;
b) Registered mortgage of land measuring 300 (three hundred) square yards situated within District-Dhaka, P.S. Previously Tejgaon, now Mohammadpur, Sub-Registry Office-Mohammadpur, Mouza-Previously Barabo, now Mohammadpur Residential Housing Area, Plot No. 11/1, Block-C, along with a four storied modern building vide execution of a registered ‘Deed of Mortgage’, being No.________ dated 12.03.2001. The property stands in the name of the defendant No.2;
c) Hypothecation of different garments items stored in the _______________________________, Dhaka vide execution of a General Letter of Hypothecation, along with a Supplementary Agreement both dated 14.03.2001;
d) Pledge of duly discharged PSP’s being No. 018988-89 dated 01.11.2000, face value of Tk. 4,00,000.00 (Taka four lac) issued by plaintiff and which stands in the name of the defendant No. 1. Letter of Authority executed by the defendant No. 1 to encash the PSP’s in question.
e) Execution of personal guarantees by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2;
f) Execution of usual charge documents, including but not limited to Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Agreement, Letter of Continuity, Letter of Revival etc;
07. That the defendant No. 1 from the very beginning purposely defaulted in making payment under the terms of the sanction letter dated 09.09.2002 and continued defaulting. The validity of the aforesaid facility was expired leaving almost the entire amount unadjusted by the defendant No.1. The plaintiff thereupon from time to time sent series of reminders to the defendant No.1, including the letters dated 08.06.2004, 27.06.2004, 05.12.2004 and 20.12.2004, requesting the defendants to adjust the liabilities, but the defendants neither bothered to adjust the outstanding amount nor took any step towards adjustment of the same.
08. That meanwhile being displeased with the reluctance of the defendant No.1 in liquidating the over dues, the plaintiff bank through their lawyer has cause served legal notice dated 30.03.2004 upon the defendants requesting to adjust their liabilities with the plaintiff bank within 15 (fifteen) days of the receipt of the said notice, with a note that failing which legal action would be initiated for recovery of the plaintiff bank’s dues.
09. That the defendant No. 1 instead of adjusting its liabilities with the plaintiff bank started seeking time by issuing letter dated 13.04.2004, wherein the defendant No. 1 committed to adjust the outstanding liabilities within a short period and at the same time defendant No. 1, requested the plaintiff to encash quasi cash securities lying with the plaintiff bank against his loan account. As such, the plaintiff bank encashed quasi cash security (PSP No. 018988-89 dated 01.11.2000 for Tk. 4.00 lac) against the loan availed by the defendant No. 1. After encashment of quasi cash security the plaintiff bank informed the matter to the defendant No. 1 and requested him to adjust the remaining loan liability but the defendant No. 1 failed miserably to adjust his liabilities.
10. That it is apparent from negative attitude of the defendants that they have been evading liquidating the long outstanding dues of the defendant No.1 with the plaintiff bank in breach of his obligation under the terms and conditions of the Sanction Letter. The plaintiff bank made repeated reminders to the defendant No. 1 to liquidate its liabilities with the plaintiff bank but the defendant No.1 continued to fail paying any attention to the plaintiff bank in this regard.
11. That the plaintiff bank gave the defendants ample time and opportunity to clear the outstanding liabilities of the defendant No. 1 but the defendants are reluctant in this regard. It is abundantly clear that the defendants would not adjust the plaintiff bank’s dues unless compelled by law. The plaintiff bank cannot wait for an indefinite period for the defendants to adjust the outstanding liabilities of the defendant No. 1 lying with the plaintiff bank. The defendants are wilfully resorting to delaying tactics to avoid repayment of the long outstanding dues. Having no alternative the plaintiff bank is compelled to file this suit against the defendants to realize its legitimate dues. The plaintiff bank states that the defendants are severally and jointly liable to repay the outstanding dues of the defendant No.1 lying with the plaintiff bank.
12. That the outstanding liability of the defendants is of Tk. ___________ (Taka ____________________) only as on _________, which the defendants are jointly and/or severally legally liable to pay:
13. That the cause of action to file this suit arose on ____________ when the defendant No. 1 opened account with the plaintiff bank, on 17.09.1998, 11.07.1999, 27.12.1999, 06.01.2000, 19.06.2000, 19.10.2000, 17.02.2001 and 09.09.2002 when the plaintiff bank sanctioned and enhanced over draft and Bank Guarantee facility to the defendant No. 1, on 11.01.1999 and 12.03.2001 when the defendant Nos. 1 & 2 mortgaged their properties in favour of the plaintiff bank, on 14.03.2001 when the defendant No. 1 hypothecated its stocks of different garments items with the plaintiff bank, on the various dates when the defendant Nos. 1 & 2 executed personal guarantees, on the various dates when the defendant No. 1 executed various charge documents, on the various dates including letters dated 08.06.2004, 27.06.2004, 05.12.2004 and 20.12.2004, when the plaintiff bank requested the defendant No. 1 to adjust the liability, on various dates including letter dated 13.04.2004, when the defendant No. 1 acknowledged his liability, on 30.03.2004 when legal notice was served by the plaintiff, on each and every date when the defendants continued to default in repaying their outstanding liabilities with the plaintiff and the said cause of action is continuing till date.
14. Thatthe suit is for realisation of a decree for a sum of Tk. ___________________(Taka___________________________) only as on ____________, of a commercial bank and the said suit is within the jurisdiction of this Court. For the purpose of court fees, the plaintiff bank values the suit at the said amount and pays the ad-valorem court fees on the said amount.
15. That the authorized representative of the plaintiff bank in the instant suit is _________________ (please insert name),_____________(please insert designation) of the plaintiff bank who is well conversant with the facts of the case.
The plaintiff bank, therefore, prays for:
(a) A decree for a sum of Tk. ___________ (Taka _______________) only as on ___________ in favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendants jointly and/or severally;
(b) A decree for the sale of the mortgaged and hypothecated properties;
(c) A decree for interest from _________ till the date of filing the instant suit @ ____% per annum and pendente lite interest at the rate stipulated in the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 from the date of filing the suit till the date of decree and from the date of decree till realization of the decretal amount;
(d) A personal decree against all the defendants;
(e) A decree for the entire costs of the Suit;
(f) Any other relief(s) to which the plaintiff bank is entitled in law and equity.
And for this act of kindness, the plaintiff bank as in duty bound shall ever pray.
SCHEDULE ‘A’
{Schedule under section 8(2) Ka Artha Rin Adalat Ain 2003}
Description of Loan & amount outstanding
| Nature of Facility | Limit
(in Tk.) |
Loan amount availed (in Tk.) | Interest
(in Tk.) |
Others/Excise Duty | Sub-total
(Principal + Interest + Others (in Tk.) |
Amount repaid as on
__________ (in Tk.) |
Outstanding amount as on
__________ (in Tk.) |
| Total | |||||||
SCHEDULE ‘B’
{Schedule under section 8(2) Kha Artha Rin Adalat Ain 2003}
Description of the mortgaged properties which the plaintiff could not dispose off
a) All that piece and parcel of land measuring 2.5 (two point five) kathas situated within District: Dhaka, P.S. Pallabi, Mouza:Senpara Parbata, J.L. No. 220 under Khatian No. 288 (Sabek), 321 (Hal), R.S. Khatian No. 3921, Plot No. 19 along with all structure(s) and building constructed and/or to be constructed thereon together with all rights, easements, interests etc., attached to the said property.
b) All that piece and parcel of land measuring 300 (three hundred) square yards situated within District-Dhaka, P.S. Previously Tejgaon, now Mohammadpur, Sub-Registry Office-Mohammadpur, Mouza-Previously Barabo, now Mohammadpur Residential Housing Area, Plot No. 11/1, Block-C, along with a four storied modern building.
c) Hypothecation of different garments items stored in the
A F F I D A V I T
I, ______________, son of ______________________ of Arab Bangladesh Bank Limited, kawran Bazar Branch, BSEC Bhaban (Ground Floor), 102, Kazi Nazrul Islam Avenue, Dhaka-1215, aged about ___ years, by faith Muslim, Nationality Bangladeshi by birth, profession service, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as follows:
1. That I am the officer of the plaintiff bank of this plaint and well conversant with the facts of the case and competent to swear this Affidavit.
2. That the statements of facts made in this application are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and rests are submissions before this Hon’ble Court and in witness whereof I swear this affidavit and signed below on this the ______day of___________, 2005 at _________ a.m. before the Commissioner of affidavit.
| DEPONENT | |
| The deponent is known to me and
identified by me. |
|
| ADVOCATE |