Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S White King Industries

DRT6 Sept 2025OA/2226/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debts Recovery Tribunal order, Canara Bank sought recovery of dues totaling Rs.26,24,157 with interest against M/s White King Industries and others. The Tribunal found the bank's case proved regarding the loan facilities and outstanding dues. The application was allowed, making the liability of all defendants joint and several.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.26,24,157 along with interest at 13.20% per annum from 11.11.2022; joint and several liability; recovery via sale of mortgaged property and other assets; issuance of Recovery Certificat

Canara Bank versus M/S White King Industries — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2226 of 2022 Date of Institution: 11.11.2022 Date of Decision: 06.09.2025

¶4

Canara Bank, having its head office at 112, JC Road, Bangalore and one of its branch office situated at Bathinda, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

M/s White King Industries, Mehma Saroj Road, V.P.O.Nahianwala, Tehsil and District- Bathinda, Punjab-151201.

¶8

Susheel Garg S/o Kewal Kumar, R/o H. No.271-C, Patel Nagar, Tehsil and District- Bathinda, Punjab-152004.

¶9

Kewal Kumar S/o Jugal Kishore, R/o H. No.271-C, Patel Nagar, Tehsil and District- Bathinda, Punjab-152004.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Sh. Munish Yadav, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- Ex parte.

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.26,24,157/- with interest @13.20% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 11.11.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Canara Bank (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.26,24,157/- with interest against M/s White King Industries and others(defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 10.04.2018, it had granted Term Loan Facility of Rs.9.90 lacs and Cash Credit Facility of Rs.12.60 lacs to defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 for business purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant no.3 had mortgaged his immoveable property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Thereafter, on 19.03.2020, at the request of defendant no.1 through its

¶17

¶18

proprietor defendant no.2, the said loan facilities were renewed. Again, during the pandemic situation, on 04.06.2020, bank had granted GECL facility of Rs.3.48 lacs. The said loan facilities were chargeable to different rate of interest. On 24.10.2022, a sum of Rs.26,24,157/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 05.01.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 01.05.2024, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-25.

¶21

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 different loan facilities and on 24.10.2022, a sum of Rs.26,24,157/- was due.

¶22

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.26,24,157/- (Rupees Twenty-Six Lacs Twenty-Four Thousand One Hundred Fifty-Seven Only) with interest @13.20% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 11.11.2022, 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, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶23

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶24

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶25

¶26

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 10.10.2025 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and hypothecated stock 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. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 06^th September, 2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh (R)

Canara Bank v. M/S White King Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S White King Industries

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

Shashi Kour Rajendrasingh Bedi versus Muthoot Housing Finance Company Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/s Sandeep and Sons

Canara Bank versus Raman Kumar

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus M/S Jakhar Flour Mills

Hdfc Bank versus Rayees Ahmad Wani

Icici Bank Limited versus Rakesh Kumar (Borrower)