Between


Mr. AaJAY KUMAR KHEMKA & Others Applicant

And

The Nodal Officer
HDFC BANK Ltd Respondant
Bangalore





Humble applicants submit this application as below:


That the applicants had filed the Securitisation Application (SA) and has attained order with referance to the DRT against HDFC bank, on the grounds of illegalities committed by the Authorised Officer of the respondent bank, in the matter of declaration of the accounts of the applicants as NPA illegally and in violation of the RBI guidelines .

That, it should be noted the authorised officer of the respondant bank has committed a premeditated crime to defame and damage and thus initiated wrongfull action against the applicants for housing loan and also for recovery of dues of M/s Deco Vitrified Inc., carrying on the business of vitrified tiles and building materials. Applicant no. 1, is the proprietor of the said firm, but due to oversite, inadvertently, the applicants, could not make the Deco Vitrified Inc., as party to the main SA, though pleadings have been made in that regard, and the respondent also has admitted the position in their reply to the SA.

That, by this application, the applicants wish to add M/s Deco Vitrified Inc., as applicant no. 3 after the applicant no. 2, as below:-
3. M/s Deco Vitrified Inc.
Through: Proprietor, Ajay Khemka
B/2, GEF Block, Rajajinagar Industrial Town,
West of Chord Road, Bangalore.

That, it would be in the interest of justice that, the name of M/s Deco Vitrified Inc., be added as applicant, since the publication of possession notice in the newspaper is also against the firm. The resondant banker had failed to corresponden with the firm , which in the 1st stance has caused irreparable damage to the firm, its reputation and the morale in the market which is much above and whatever the HDFC Bank states that it has incurred .

That, the applicants, further wish to add the name of the bank through the Managing Director, as respondent no. 2, as below:
2. The HDFC Bank Ltd.
The Director,
Tradestar – A wing, 3rd Floor,
Opposite JB Nagar Fish Market,
Andheri Kurla Road,
Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400059
Since, the bank is company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, the said company is has been sued in the name of the company through Principal Officer. Managing Director of the company is the principal officer of the company, hence, the company was added to be the priciple respondent, as ultimately, it is the company and the principal officer of such company, who are responsible to the misdeeds of the officer for the acts & omissions committed by him. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the bank was added as company, through it’s head office at Bombay, headed by it’s principal officer the Director.

Need for Action: The following action against the wrongfull implementation of Serfaesi was challenged by the applicant against the respondant and
the applicant had attained the stay order verdict in the Bangalore DRT.
MA(SA) 587/2010:-@ The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant stated that the vacating of the stay granted on 23.04.2010.
Further by Order of the DRT dated 29.07.2010 vacated the stay granted on 23.04.2010 .@ The Presiding Officer DRT, Bangalore was directed to take up the SA itself for disposal and dispose of the same in accordance with law on or before 15.12.2010. @In the meanwhile, the authorized officer shall stand restrained from in any way proceeding any further under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act till 15.12.2010.
The unconditional stay order achieved by the applicant in the Bangalore DRT
was thus overuled but again on pleading the Hon. DRAT Court at Chennai has upheld the Stay.

Prayer: In all these legalities and the procedures the applicant has been
subject to harrassment, uncertainty . The following action which started from the principle premeditated crime committed by the banking official of which the director of HDFC is a party ,has put the applicant to undue stress and damage to repute and also resulted in loss of opportunity to the applicant. In view of the losses incurred by the applicant by medium of harrassment , loss of time, loss of health it is prayed to the Hon.Consumer Court to address and adjudicate the proceedings to attain arbitratory resolution to
this longstanding deadlock.
In addition it is prayed that Opportunity loss be granted to the applcant herin Mr.Aajay Khemka who has suffered from
opportunity losses vai audit report to the tune of Rs.10 lakhs by wrongfull display of public document by CIBIL.

Place : Chennai
Dated : 21-02-2011
Submitted by the Applicant and others Through their Legal Mandate Holder : DR.B.N.SOANS