Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/s Maa Vindhyavasini Traders

DRT23 Jul 2025OA/260/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This tribunal allowed an application by Indian Bank under Section 19 of the RDBA to recover dues of Rs. 23,73,957 along with interest from three proprietorship and two guarantor respondents, determining the debt and issuing a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 23,73,957 with interest at 10% p.a. jointly and severally alongside a recovery certificate and attachment of mortgaged assets.

Indian Bank versus M/s Maa Vindhyavasini Traders — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

OA 260 of20241JI

DRT, PATN A

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶5

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶6

OA Case No. 260 of 2024

¶7

Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank), at Buxar Branch-2, Naya Chowk, P.S.- Buxar, District- Buxar- 802101

¶8

. . . . . . . Applicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s Maa Vindhyavasini Traders, situated at Mohalla- Yamuna Chowk, P.O.- Buxar, P.S.- Buxar, District- Buxar – 802101 (Proprietorship firm)

¶11

Vikash Kumar Keshri, son of Sri Vinay Kumar Keshri, Resident of Mohalla- Yamuna Chowk, Near Nagar Parishad, P.O.- Buxar, P.S.Buxar, District- Buxar – 802101, PAN – AYZPK9607J (Borrower)

¶12

Vinay Kumar Keshri, Son of Sri Mahabir Prasad Keshri, Resident of Mohalla- Darzi Mohalla, Yamuna Chowk, P.O.- Buxar, P.S.- Buxar, District- Buxar – 802101, PAN – AXSPK4917F (Guarantor)

¶13

Ranjana Keshri, Wife of Sri Vinay Kumar Keshri, Resident of Mohalla- Darzi Mohalla, Yamuna Chowk, P.O.- Buxar, P.S.- Buxar, District- Buxar – 802101, PAN –AXSPK492 IF (Guarantor)

¶14

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶15

Present:

¶16

For the Applicant Shri Raj an Ghoshrave, Advocate For the Defendants Shri Pankaj Kumar, Advocate

¶17

Dated:23.07.2025

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 07.05.2024 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.23,73,957/- as on 02.05.2024 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 03.05.2024 with costs till realization

OA 260 of 20241JI

DRT, PATNA

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant.

¶24

Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship firm engaged in the business of Distribution of P Dlite, Eveready, Supermax and other FMCG products of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendant no. 3 and 4 are the guarantors to the loan facilities availed by the borrower. Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanction of cash credit loan of Rs.9 Lakh ''ide loan application dated 29.08.2015, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 29.08.2015 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents.

¶25

Defendants again approached the applicant bank for enhancement of cash credit loan of Rs.9 Lakh to Rs. 12 Lakh vide loan application dated 15.02.2017, which was sanctioned/enhanced by the applicant bank on 15.02.2017 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents.

¶26

Defendants again approached the applicant bank for enhancement of cash credit loan of Rs.12 Lakh to Rs.20 Lakh vide loan application dated 01.03.2018, which was sanctioned/enhanced by the applicant bank on 28.03.2018 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents.

¶27

On 30.09.2020, the defendant no.2 further applied for “IND-GECLSCOVID-19” loan to the bank and the bank sanctioned Rs.04 Lakh on 30.09.2020 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents.

OA 260 of 2024[JI

DRT, PATNA

On 02.12.2021, the defendant no.2 further applied for Term Loan under the scheme of “IND-GECLS-1.0” loan to the bank and the bank sanctioned Rs.1.70 Lakh on 27.12.2021 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents.

¶32

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities, the defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 28.09.2022.

¶33

Since, the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶34

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.23,73,957/- as on 02.05.2024 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 03.05.2024 till the realization.

¶35

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 12.07.2024, requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993.

¶36

In response to the notice the defendant no.2 being proprietor of defendant no.1 has appeared on 02.07.2024 and the defendant no.3 & 4 have appeared on 30.07.2024 but they have failed to file their written statement within the statutory period hence vide order dated 17. 10.2024, opportunity for filing of written statement was closed and an opportunity was granted to the defendants to file rebuttal evidence.

¶37

Rebuttal evidence has been filed by the defendants admitting therein that at the request of the defendants, the applicant bank has sanctioned loan facilities to the defendants which were enhanced time to time. It has further

DRT, PATNA

OA 260 of 20241JI

been stated that the security amount provided by the defendants in the shape of F.D. Certificate and LIC Policy certificate total amount of Rs.9,04,548/- was seized by the bank against the amount of loan sanctioned to the defendant no.2 and altogether Rs.22,02,186/- (Approx) was deposited by the defendant no.2. It has further been stated that defendant no.2 has suffered a lot and his business was badly hampered. Despite of repeated request made by the defendant no.2, the bank was never ready for settlement of the loan account with the defendant no.2.

¶42

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Manish Kumar, Senior Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶43

SI.No	Description Documents Photocopies of	I Date of Execution	1Amount 1(in Lakh)	I Signature no 1Executants I	IAnn. INo.
1	Gazettenotification	04.03.2020		Bank
2	llication Loanal	19.08.2015	9.00	Def.no.1&2	2
3	Sanctionletter	29.08.2015	9.00	Bank	3
4	DP Note	29.08.2015	9.00	Bank	4
5	Sanctionletter	15.02.2017	12.50	Bank	5
6	General Hypothecation letter	15.02.2017	12.50	Def.no.I&2	6
7	Loanapplication	01.03.2018	e		7
8	Sanctionletter	28.03.2018	mT		8
9	D Pnote	28.03.2018	e		9
10	General r1 1 letter )othecation of	28.03.2018	e		10
11	Letterofguarantee		20.00	Def.no.3&4	11
12	)	30.09.2020	4.00	Def.no.I&2	12
13	Sanction letter	30.09.2020	4.00	Bank	13
14	Singje/Joint DP Note	30.09.2020	4.00	Def.no.1&2	14
15	e agreement	30.09.2020	4.00	Def.no.I&2	15
16	Agreementof Hypothecation	30.09.2020	4.00 20.00	Def.no.I&2	16
17	Loanapplication	02.12.2021	1.70	Def.no.1&2	17
18	Sanctionletter	27.12.2021	1.70	Def.no.1&2	18
19	Singje/Joint DP Note	27.12.2021	1.70	Def.no.1&2	19
20	Term loan agreement	27.12.2021	1.70	Def.no.1&2	20
21	Agreementof Hypothecation	27.12.2021	e		21
BTo	Statementofaccount				22 to 24

DRT, PATNA

OA 260 of 20241JI

PhotocopyofPostal			25 to 28
receiDt
Legal notice	21.02.2024	Bank’sadv,	29to31

¶49

Heard arguments and perused the case record. During the course of arguments, there is no any specific denial on behalf of the defendants with regards to the sanction of loan facilities and its utilization and further there is no any specific denial with regards to the execution of loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank

¶50

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loans and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loans. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶51

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶52

It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶53

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 28.09.2022, whereas the present application has been filed on 07.05.2024. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

OA 260 of20241JI

DRT, PATNA

Shri Manish Kumar, Senior Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant bank has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶58

Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (1) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶59

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant, the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶60

The rule 12 (11) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker’s Books evidence that Act, 1891 (18 of 1891) shall apply to a certified copy of an entry in a Banker’s Books fUrnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶61

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certified copy of any entry in a banker’s book shaH in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible, but not fwther or otherwise.

¶62

As such the certified true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence. The statement of account maintained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

¶63

15 . On perusal of the application, documents, affidavit and on consideration of the arguments, it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account. /

Q„\i

OA 260 of2024IJI

DRT, PATNA

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O. A., was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 02.05.2024 has been proved to be Rs.23,73,957/- only by way of statement of accounts. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶69

In my view, facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly, the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.23,73,957/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10% p.a. simple from 07.05.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶70

ORDER

¶71

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.23,73,957/- along with pendente-lite and fUture interest @ 10% p.a. simple from 07.05.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶72

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶73

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery Certificate before the Registrar/Sub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets

OA 260 of2024jJI

DRT, PATNA

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants. The Recovery Officer will issue demand notice to the Certificate debtors only after the proof of compliance under rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules 1993, is submitted. The copy of this judgment be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.

¶78

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 03.09.2025. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶79

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 23'd day of July, 2025. n ',//

¶80

n ',// / / -)\ A -_ rr'f.,\D

¶81

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶82

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶83

FORM NO. 9 [See Regulation 24(1 )]

¶84

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶85

2nd Floor) (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan1 Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPC)A), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-81)002 S

¶86

RECOVERY CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 19(Z)(B) BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1993, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME,

R(,’ No. 244/2025 IN

Case No: OA/260/2024

In the Matter of:

(CH- 1) INDIAN BANK AT BUXAR BRANCH- 2, NAYA CHOWK, P.S.BUXAR, BUXAR,BIHAR -802 1 0 1

¶91

Applicant(s )

¶92

¶93

(CD- 1) M/S MAAViNDHYAVASrNI TRADERS (Proprietorship firm) situated at Mohalla -Yamuna (.'ho\’k. P.o.- Buxar, P.S.- Buxar, Buxar,BIH AR -802 1 0 1

¶94

(CD- 2) VIKASH KUMAR KESHRI SON OF SRI VINAY KUMAR KESHRI, RESIDENT OF MQHALLA- YAMUNA CHOWK, NEAR NAGAR PARISHAD, P.0.- BUXAR, P.S.- BUXAR- 802 101

¶95

(CD- 3) VIN AY KUMAR KESHRI SON OF SRI MAHABIR PRASAD KESHRI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- DARZI MOHALLA, YAMUNA CHOWK, P.0.- BUXAR, P.S.- BUXAR, DISTRICT- BUXAR- 802 1 01

¶96

Defendant(s)

¶97

(CD- 4) RANJANA KESHRI (GUARANTOR) WIFE OF SRI VINAY KUMAR KESHRI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- DARZI MOH ALLA, YAMUNA CHOWK, P.0.- BUXAR, P.S.- BUXAR, DISTRICTBUXAR- 802 1 O 1

¶98

Recovery Certificate for Rs 2373957.00 1 Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Seventy Three Thousands Nine Hundred Fifty Seven Only]

¶99

In terms of final order dated 23/07/2025 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 2373957.00 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 07/05/2024 i.e. date of tiling / with effective date of the OA/260/2024 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶100

CD Name Type	Int. I Type/Mode	Int. iIRate	IIEtYective ii Date	Order Date
4/SMAA VINDHYAVASINI ERS		10	r/05/2024		'3957.00			b73957
KASH KUMAR KESHRI	LIIAc Interest Yearly)	10			b73957.00
VINAYKUMAR KES HRI	1 1(ns Interest :Yearly)	10		;/07/2025	;l2373957.00	ly ly	In Order	173957
		10	17/05/2024		b73957.00	ltly And ly		l73957

¶101

In case of faiLure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.

¶102

The morlgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 .

¶103

Parties are directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR , Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATN A on 03/09/2025

¶104

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 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 Debtors

¶105

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this^24/07/2025

¶106

¶107

C-. RegIstrar Debts Recovery Tribunal Patna

¶108

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶109

FORM NO. 10

¶110

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶111

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶112

2nd Floor! ( A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar ( C,POA)1 Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025 .

¶113

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

¶114

RC No. 244/2025 IN

¶115

Case No: OA/260/2024

¶116

Applicant(s): INDIAN BANK

¶117

Versus

¶118

Defendant(s): M/S MAA VINDHYAVASINI TRADERS

¶119

	je	F––– Amount inRs
	imo	m6
2	r	ro
	AdvocateFees	[0
	v	[0
5	s
	Total Costs:Rs	m6

Place: PATNA

Date: 24/07/2025

t//

PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶124

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Indian Bank v. M/s Maa Vindhyavasini Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/s Maa Vindhyavasini Traders

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

Manik Roy and another versus Union Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Balvir Singh

Uco Bank versus M/S Aloft Trucking Pvt. Ltd.

Mr Tushar Kanti Das versus Murshidabad District Central Co-Operative Bank

Ms Remission Diagnostic and Poly Clinic Center and Anr. versus Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India)

Rina Rai and Others versus Idbi Bank