Allowed

Bank of India v. Ms Heanu Poultry Farm

DRT9 Jul 2025OA/1587/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs. 37,72,470 with interest. The court found the bank proved its case and directed recovery from mortgaged and hypothecated assets as well as personal property of the respondents.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 37,72,470 with interest @13.75% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Direction to distribute sale proceeds of mortgaged property.

Bank of India versus Ms Heanu Poultry Farm — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1587/2022 Date of Institution: 25.08.2022 Date of Decision: 09.07.2025

¶4

Bank of India at Loharu Road, Near Bus Stand, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

M/s Heanu Poultry Farm, Village Badrai, Tehsil Badhra, District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana-127308, through its Proprietor Sh. Mukesh Kumar S/o Sh. Satyawan

¶7

Sh. Mukesh Kumar S/o Sh. Satyawan, Proprietor M/s Heanu Poultry Farm, r/o Village Dubaldhan, Tehsil Beri, District Jhajjar, Haryana-124202, presently residing at Ward No. 1, M C Colony, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsil and District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana127306

¶8

Smt. Kamlesh W/o Sh. Satyawan and d/o Late Sh. Joginder Singh, r/o Village Dubaldhan, Tehsil Beri, District Jhajjar, Haryana-124202, presently residing at Ward No. 1, M C Colony, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsil and District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana127306

¶9

…….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Sahil Jaswal Proxy Counsel for Sh. Ranjan Lohan, Counsel for the applicant bank Defendants- ex parte

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.37,72,470/- with interest @13.75% per annum with monthly rests from 25.08.2022.

¶13

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Bank of India (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.37,72,470/- with interest against M/s Heanu Poultry Farm and Others (defendants).

¶16

Defendant No. 1 is a proprietorship firm of defendant No. 2. Bank’s case is that on 15.10.2013, it had granted a loan of Rs.28.00 Lacs to defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in the form of Cash Credit Facility for business purpose. Defendant No. 3 stood as guarantor. To secure the loan, defendant No. 3 had mortgaged her property (fully detailed in para No.5.6 of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @13.75% per annum with monthly rests. On 10.08.2022, a sum of Rs.37,72,470/was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

On 01.10.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 21.10.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶18

4.	In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affid	avit of Sh. Murari Mahto, Chief Manager along with the loan and
secu	rity documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-17.
5.	I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered
view	that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of
Rs.2	8.00 Lacs and on 10.08.2022, a sum of Rs.37,72,470/- was due.
6.	Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.3	7,72,470/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Seventy Two Thousand Four

¶19

¶20

Hundred and Seventy Only) with interest @13.75% per annum with monthly rests from 25.08.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property(ies) fully detailed in para No.5.6 of the application as well as from the hypothecated assets/stocks/goods/book debts etc. and personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶21

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 16.08.2025 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property(ies) as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶22

Pronounced in the open Court (A S Narang) Dated: 09.07.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh (Additional charge)

Bank of India v. Ms Heanu Poultry Farm

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Ms Heanu Poultry Farm

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

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Rohit Bajaj

State Bank of India versus Shri Vishnu Pandurang Sawake

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Sangeeta Trader

Canara Bank versus Sh. Surjeet Singh @Surjit Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Kulwant Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sukhdev Singh