Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/s Hardware Unlimited

DRT10 Jul 2025OA/336/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In ex-parte proceedings, the Debts Recovery Tribunal approved an application by Bank of Baroda to recover a debt of Rs. 29.38 lakhs from a hardware proprietor who defaulted on a cash credit facility. The debt was proven via loan documents and bank records.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 29,38,265/- plus interest @ 8.15% p.a. jointly and severally against respondents; assets attached.

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Hardware Unlimited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

OA 336 of 2024IJI

DRT, PATNA

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶5

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶6

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶7

OA Case No. 336 of 2024

¶8

Bank of Baroda, Patna Main Branch. Ddk Bunglow Chowk, Fraser Road, Patna

¶9

. . . . . . .Applicant

¶10

¶11

M/s Hardware Unlimited through proprietor Mr. Chand Babu, Ground Floor, C/o Saheb Raja, Nirala Nagdr Colony, Near Patliputra Rail Parisar, Digha, Diara, Patna 800011 (Borrower)

¶12

Mr. C:hand Babu, S/o Saheb Raja, Ground Floor, Nirala Nagar Colony, Near Patliputra Rail Parisar, Digha. Ditlra, Patna 800011 (Borrower)

¶13

. Defendants

¶14

Present:

¶15

For the Applicant Shri Anjani Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Defendants None

¶16

Dated: 10.07.2025

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

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 13.06.2024 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.29,38,265/- as on 05.05.2024 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 06.05.2024 with costs till realization.

¶19

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.

¶20

Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship firm engaged in the business of Hardware Products, of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanctioll of Cash credit facility of Rs.40 Lakh under CGTMSE Scheme vide loan application ,which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 31.03.2022 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants.

OA 336 of20241JI

DRT, PATNA

To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also hypothecated the stocks in favour of the applicant bank.

¶25

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 19.04.2023 .

¶26

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.

¶27

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.29,38,265/- as on 05.05.2024 with pendente-lite and fbture interest contractual rate from 06.05.2024 till the realization.

¶28

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 04.07.2024 & 28.10.2024, 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.

¶29

Despite the service of registered summons/notices, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 06.02.2025 .

¶30

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bark has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Sanjay Kumar Ray, Assistant General Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are

¶31

as follows:

¶32

Description of	of 1Date	1Arno
Documents	Execution	(in	Executants	Ann
Photocopies		Lakh)		No
Loanapplication		JO.e

OA 336 of2024jJl

DRT, PATN A

e	ofsanction	3 1.03.2022	40.00	1 Bank accepted defendants	12
3	Composite hypothecation agreement	31.03.2022	e	I
4	Photocopy of rent agreement	17.10.2022			4
5	Dea undertakings cum authorit	3 1 .03 .2022		Defendants	5
6	with PDR	31.03.2022	e		6
7	Registration certificate				7
8	Letter of sole proprietorship & letter ofcontinuing securrt'	31.03 .2022	e		8
	mo	3 1.03.2022	40.00	Defendants	9
	Legal notice	10.04.2024		Bank adv.
	a			Bank

¶37

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶38

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. 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.

¶39

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

¶40

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. n / \a7

DRT, PATNA

OA 336 of 20241JI

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 19.04.2023, whereas the present application has been filed on 13.06.2024. 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.

¶45

Shri Sanjay Kumar Ray, Assistant General Manager 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.

¶46

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.

¶47

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.

¶48

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.

¶49

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries iII bankers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certifIed copy of any entry in a banker’s book shall in all legal proccc,iings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such ent}-y, and shall be adnritted 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 further or other\v ise.

¶50

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.

OA 336 of2024jJI

DRT, PATNA

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.

¶55

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 05.05.2024 has been proved to be Rs.29,38,265/- 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.

¶56

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.29,38,265/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 8.15% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 13.06.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶57

ORDER

¶58

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.29,38,265/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 8.15% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 13.06.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶59

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

¶60

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the nrortgaged or hypothecated or any

OA 336 of 20241JI

DRT, PATNA

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.

¶65

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 marmer and mode prescribed undet 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.

¶66

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 20.08.2025. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶67

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 10th day of July, 2025. a ad// V/’ / Dictated &corrected by me.me. :) \O C „/’ \H~

¶68

Dictated &corrected by me.me.

¶69

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶70

¶71

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

¶72

DEBTS RE(,'OVER\’ TRIBUNAL PATN A

¶73

2nd Floor, ( A. B & F WIng) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶74

RECOVERY CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 19(Z) READ WITH SECTION 19(B) OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1993, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

RC No. 211/2025

Case No: OA/336/2024

In the Matter of:

(CH- 1) BANK OF BARODA

¶80

PATN A MAiN BRANCH. DAK BUNGLOW CHOWK. FRAZER ROAD PATN A .BIHAR -o

¶81

Applicant(s)

¶82

To (CD- 1) M/S HARDWARE UNLTMTTED through its Proprietor Mr. Chand babu Ground Floor. C/o Saheb Raja, Nirala Nagar Colony, Near Patliputra Rail Parisar, Digha, Diara, Patnu ,BIHAR -8000 IJ

¶83

Defendant(s)

¶84

(CD- 2) MR. ('HAND BABU

¶85

S/O- SAHEB RAJA, GROUND FLOOR. NIRALA NAGAR COLONY. NEAR

¶86

PATLIPUTRA RAIL PARISAR. DIGHA DIARA, PATN A- 8000 11

¶87

Recovery Certificate for Rs 2938265.00 1 Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousands Two Hundred Sixty Five OnI\ -1

¶88

In terms of final order dated 10/07/2025 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. 2938265.00 along with cost. expenses and interest from the 13/06/2024 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the OA/336/2024 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶89

CDName	Int. Int TypeType/Node	IEffective Date	Order Date	„„..„„„,	";=:	Interest ~'1 8:= Date)	: RC ,mount(Rs.)
M/S HARDWARE UNLIMITED	>mpound Interest 4onthly )	13/06/2024£l	Io/07/2025l	2938265.oo	lointly rerally	lterest on EOrder	138265.00
MR.CHAND BABU	:ompound 15 Intcrest Monthjy )	113/06/2024:I	1o/07/2025	'l2938265.oo	lointly	[nterest on Order lte	18265.00

¶90

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered nom the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certi ficate debtors

¶91

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 proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1 993 Parties are directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR , Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 20/08/2025

¶92

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 Cerlificate Debtors.

¶93

This C-ertiticate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this I1/07/2025

¶94

¶95

PRES AgInG OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶96

FORM NO. 10

¶97

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶98

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶99

2nd Floor. ( A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar

¶100

(GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶101

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 211/2025

Case No: OA/336/2024

Applicant(s): BANK OF BARODA

¶106

Versus

¶107

Defendant(s): M/S HARDWARE UNLIMITED

¶108

Item ofCosts	IAmountinRs
Feeon the application	132000
r	He
AdvocateFees	g(j
e	ro
==lie	b
TotalCosts:Rs	m3

¶109

Place: PATNA

¶110

Date: 11/07/2025

¶111

PRESMNG OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶112

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Bank of Baroda v. M/s Hardware Unlimited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/s Hardware Unlimited

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

Mohammed Shareef versus Manjeri Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Mrs. Sunita Wattal

Bank of India versus Ms Heanu Poultry Farm

Hotel Lake View versus Punjab National Bank

Modern Seeds versus State Bank of India

Rakesh Kumar versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited