Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M S Vansh Marketing

DRT28 May 2025OA/1011/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application. The bank recovered Rs. 32,77,330.88 plus future 9% simple interest. The tribunal ordered joint and several liability and relief from pendente lite interest due to COVID-19 impact.

What did the court decide?

Defendant jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 32,77,330.88 plus 9% simple interest; recovery from all assets including hypothecated and personal properties.

Union Bank of India versus M S Vansh Marketing — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

“ORIGINALAPPLICATION” No. 1011 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR

¶3

PRESENT- SHRI VIMAL GUPTA

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

O.A. NO. 1011 OF 2022

¶6

DATE OF DELIVERY OF ORDER 28.05.2025

¶7

Union Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and having its Head Office at Union Bank Building, 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, 400021 and FGMO office at Ajmer Road Jaipur having several Branches throughout India and abroad inter alia a Branch office at G-1 & 13 on Ground Floor in Shubh Laxmi Tower, Plot No. B-4, Central Spine, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur through its Branch Manager/Sr. Manager Master Vahid Khan.

¶8

…..Applicant Bank…..

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

1. M/s Vansh Marketing through its proprietor Shri Gajendra Jangid, R/o 39, Madan Badi, Sector No. 3, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur-302039.

¶11

2. Shri Gajendra Jangid S/o Shri Babu Lal Jangid, R/o 39, Madan Badi, Sector No. 3, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur302039.

¶12

……Defendants…..

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant Bank Sh. Prakash Pareek Counsel for the Defendants Sh. R. K. Bhargav

OA No. 1011 of 2022

JUDGMENT

This Original Application was filed by the applicant bank on 29.08.2022 for recovery of outstanding amount of Rs. 32,77,330.88 from the Defendants.

¶18

As per the pleadings, Defendant No. 1 is proprietorship firm and Defendant no. 2 in the capacity of Proprietor and Guarantor had approached the applicant bank for availing Cash Credit facility. After due consideration, cash credit facility was sanctioned by the Applicant Bank in favour of Defendants in the year 2019 vide sanction letter dated 21.08.2019. Defendants were also granted WCDL facility by the applicant bank vide sanction letter dated 20.12.2019 for sum of Rs. 05.00 Lacs and also sanctioned Working Capital Term Loan vide sanction letter dated 24.06.2020. Defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and therefore, their loan account was classified as NPA on 01.04.2021. Applicant Bank has therefore, filed this original application for recovery of its dues against the Defendants.

¶19

Summons were issued to the Defendants on 22.09.2022. Sh. R. K. Bhargav filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the Defendants and filed reply on 08.05.2023.

¶20

Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶21

Ld. Counsel for the Defendants very fairly submits that they are not denying availment of the loan and creating of security and he submits that due to COVID-19, the defendants have suffered heavily and Tribunal is

¶22

¶23

OA No. 1011 of 2022

¶24

empowered to grant interest from the date of NPA. He seeks the relaxation for the same.

¶25

As stated supra, the Applicant Bank filed the evidence affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents, viz Exhibit A/1 to A/42 marked on behalf of the applicant bank, clinches the claim of the applicant bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly & severally liable to pay to the applicant bank the claim made in O.A. with future interest and costs.

¶26

In these circumstances, The Tribunal is of the opinion that due to COVID-19 entire country has suffered a lot and the defendants must have suffered, so to balance the equity, no pendente lite interest be charged.

¶27

In the result, this O.A. No. 1011 of 2022 is allowed declaring that:-

¶28

a) The Defendants are jointly & severally liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs. 32,77,330.88 (Rupees Thirty Two Lac Seventy Seven Thousand Three Hundred Thirty and Eighty Eight Paisa only) with future interest @ 9% (Simple).

¶29

b) The applicant bank is entitled to recover the above amount from the sale of hypothecated assets and as well as from the personal movable and immovable properties/assets of Defendants. The applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same towards recovery of its debt.

¶30

¶31

OA No. 1011 of 2022

¶32

c) The applicant bank is entitled to the costs of the O.A.

¶33

The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, DRT, Jaipur.

¶34

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Jaipur on 15.09.2025 .

¶35

Prepare Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

A copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate be given or sent by registered post to each of the parties free. A copy of the Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer of this Tribunal for necessary action as per the law.

¶37

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶38

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.05.2025 .

¶39

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶40

Signed and uploaded on 02.06.2025

¶41

¶42

OA No. 1011 of 2022

¶43

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR PRESENT- SHRI VIMAL GUPTA

¶44

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶45

O.A. NO. 1011 OF 2022

¶46

DATE OF DELIVERY OF ORDER 28.05.2025

¶47

RECOVERY CERTIFICATE

¶48

(UNDER SUB Section 22 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (Act 51 of 1993)

…..Applicant Bank…..

VERSUS

1. M/s Vansh Marketing through its proprietor Shri Gajendra Jangid, R/o 39, Madan Badi, Sector No. 3, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur-302039.

¶53

2. Shri Gajendra Jangid S/o Shri Babu Lal Jangid, R/o 39, Madan Badi, Sector No. 3, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur302039.

……Defendants…..

OA No. 1011 of 2022

Recovery Certificate for Rs. 32,77,330.88/-

¶58

In terms of final order dated 28.05.2025 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the-

¶59

a) The Defendants are jointly & severally liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs. 32,77,330.88 (Rupees Thirty Two Lac Seventy Seven Thousand Three Hundred Thirty and Eighty Eight Paisa only) with future interest @ 9% (Simple).

¶60

b) The applicant bank is entitled to recover the above amount from the sale of hypothecated assets and as well as from the personal movable and immovable properties/assets of Defendants. The applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same towards recovery of its debt.

¶61

c) The applicant bank is entitled to the costs of the O.A.

¶62

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Jaipur on 15.09.2025 .

¶63

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Section 25 and 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amended from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtor.

¶64

This Certificate has been issued under my signatures and seal of the Tribunal on 28.05.2025 .

¶65

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶66

Signed and uploaded on 02.06.2025

¶67

¶68

OA No. 1011 of 2022

¶69

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR PRESENT- SHRI VIMAL GUPTA

¶70

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶71

O.A. NO. 1011 OF 2022

¶72

DATE OF DELIVERY OF ORDER 28.05.2025

¶73

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE

MEMO OF COST

…..Applicant Bank…..

VERSUS

1. M/s Vansh Marketing through its proprietor Shri Gajendra Jangid, R/o 39, Madan Badi, Sector No. 3, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur-302039.

¶79

2. Shri Gajendra Jangid S/o Shri Babu Lal Jangid, R/o 39, Madan Badi, Sector No. 3, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur302039.

……Defendants…..

OA No. 1011 of 2022

S.No.	Item of Costs	Amount (Rs.)
1	Fee on the Application	35,005.00
2	Process Fee (Inc. Publication)	94.00
3	Advocate Fee	1,250.00
4	Commission/Receiver/Valuation	NIL
5.	Miscellaneous Charges	NIL
	Total	36,349.00

¶84

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶85

Signed and uploaded on 02.06.2025

OA No. 1011 of 2022

28.05.2025

Counsel:

Sh. Prakash Pareek, Counsel for Applicant Bank Sh. R. K. Bhargav, Counsel for the Defendants

¶91

Judgment dictated separately and pronounced in the open court. As per order the O.A. is allowed. Recovery Certificate be prepared accordingly and the Registry is directed to verify the Recovery Certificate as per Regulation 24(1) and (2) of Debts Recovery Tribunal Jaipur Regulation 2015 and after verification place the same before the Tribunal.

¶92

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶93

Signed and uploaded on 02.06.2025

OA No. 1011 of 2022

28.05.2025

Counsel:

Sh. Prakash Pareek, Counsel for Applicant Bank Sh. R. K. Bhargav, Counsel for the Defendants

¶99

The Tribunal vide order dated 28.05.2025 , directed the Registrar to verify the Recovery Certificate as per Regulation 24(1) and (2) of Debts Recovery Tribunal Jaipur Regulation 2015.

¶100

The Registrar vide order dated 28.05.2025 verified the Recovery Certificate as per Regulation 24(1) and (2) of Debts Recovery Tribunal Jaipur Regulation 2015. Recovery Certificate is prepared accordingly. Copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate be given free to the concerned parties as well as be sent to the Recovery Officer for further proceedings. File be put up before the Registrar for compliance. After compliance file be consigned to record.

¶101

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶102

Signed and uploaded on 02.06.2025

Union Bank of India v. M S Vansh Marketing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M S Vansh Marketing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kotak Mahindra Bank versus M/S Derby Textile Ltd.

Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank versus Davinder Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Jitendra Tyagi

Uco Bank versus Ram Kumar Verma

Ms Baba Khem Dass Shiksha Samiti versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M S Hotel the Vedanta Sara