Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sabir Ali

DRT25 Aug 2025OA/117/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of dues against a borrower who failed to repay cash credit and GECL loans. The tribunal proceeded ex-parte due to the defendant's absence and directed enforcement of the decree.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs.53,36,883.85/- with interest and costs; recovery certificate issued for sale of hypothecated stock and properties.

Canara Bank versus Sabir Ali — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

0.A. No. 117 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No.117 of 2023

¶5

Canara Bank

¶6

CSC Market, Pocket-A, Mayur Vihar Phase-II, New Delhi-110091

Applicant

Versus

Sabir Ali

S/o Mohd. Siddiq Proprietor of M/s Sabir and Subhan Agro Traders B-144, New Azadpur Sabzi Mandi Azadpur, Delhi-110033

¶11

Also at: F-281, Shaheen Bagh Okhla, Delhi-110025

¶12

Also at: M-101, Street no.4 Sundar Nagri Delhi-110093 Defendant

¶13

Present: Mr. Atul Kumar, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Institution: 03.01.2023

¶15

Date of Pronouncement: 25.08.2025

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 03.01.2023 before DRT-1, Delhi through its authorized representative under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to

¶18

¶19

0.A. No. 117 of 2023

¶20

Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.53,36,883.85/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Three and Paisa Eighty Five only) along with pendentelite and future interest ©12% per annum with monthly rests plus 2% penal interest from 12.12.2022 till the date of realization along with costs.

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit Limit Facility for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only) on 15.01.2020, which was enhanced to Rs.20,00,000/- on 15.06.2020, and then to Rs.45,00,000/- in June 2021 ©8.30% interest per annum with monthly rests along with 2% penal interest against hypothecation of stocks. Further, on the request of the defendant, the applicant bank sanctioned GECL Loan of Rs.1,91,000/- (Rupees One Lac Ninety One Thousand only) on 03.06.2020 ©7.90% interest per annum with monthly rests, which was repayable in 36 equated Monthly Installments of Rs.5,796/- each and last installment of Rs.6,016/-, and GECL 1.0 Extension for a sum of Rs.4,30,000/- on 25.10.2021 ©7.50% interest per annum with monthly rests along with penal interest.

¶22

In order to avail the loan facility, the defendant submitted loan application and executed Original Agreement cum Deed of Hypothecation, Copy of Pronote, Letter of Undertaking, Cash Credit Agreement, Letter of Proprietorship, Request for Overdraft facility, Supplemental Agreement, Link letter, Letter of Renewal with the applicant bank.

¶23

51-

¶24

O.A. No. 117 of 2023

¶25

The Defendant executed Acknowledgement of debt and Security dated 30.06.2021 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to maintain financial discipline for regularization of the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.11.2022 and issued a legal demand notice dated 01.12.2022 but the defendant failed to regularize the account. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶27

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 01.05.2025, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

¶28

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Jagdev Singh, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Authority letter, General power of Attorney, Application for Credit facility, Sanction letter, Agreement cum Deed of Hypothecation, Copy of Pronote, Letter of Undertaking, Copy of Cash Credit Agreement, Letter of Proprietorship, Request for Overdraft facility, Supplemental agreement, Link letter, Letter of Renewal, Letter of Proprietorship, Acknowledgement of debt and Security, Offer letter of GECL 1.0 Extension, Disbursement Request, Undertaking letter, Legal Demand notice, Statement of account

¶29

¶30

0.A. No. 117 of 2023

¶31

under Banker's Books' Evidence Act Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/37 (Colly).

¶32

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶33

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶34

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶35

ORDER

¶36

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.53,36,883.85/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Three and Paisa Eighty Five only) together with pendentelite and future interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 12.12.2022 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stock, raw material, etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶37

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶38

O.A. No. 117 of 2023

¶39

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT t, Delhi on 27.10.2025.

¶40

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶41

(GOVINtlaVAIWIHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶42

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 25.08.2025

Canara Bank v. Sabir Ali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sabir Ali

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 Limited versus Sh. Jarnail Singh

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Sh. Balvir Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Rola Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Guru Amardass Transport

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Sh. Santokh Singh

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Smt Mahinder Kaur @ Mohinder Kaur