Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Lm Enterprises

DRT29 Jul 2025OA/501/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Originating Application filed by Canara Bank for the recovery of Rs. 31,41,542.77 along with interest against the defendants. The Bank proved its case via affidavit evidence, and the Tribunal decreed the recovery against the defendants jointly and severally.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 31,41,542.77 plus interest @ 8.5% p.a. allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; sale of assets directed.

Canara Bank versus M/S Lm Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 501/2022

¶4

Date of Institution: 14.03.2022 Date of Decision: 29.07.2025

¶5

Canara Bank at SCO 167-168, Sector 8 C, Chandigarh-160018

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

M/s LM Enterprises, a Partnership concern situated at Khasra No.496/46, Village Billanwali Labana, Baddi, Post Office and Tehsil Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, through its Partners Sh. Anil Kumar and Ms Meena

¶9

Sh. Anil Kumar Bhardwaj S/o Sh. Shiv Ram Bhardwaj, r/o Village Chiuni, P.O. Lower Koti, Tehsil Rohru, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh-171207

¶10

Ms Meena D/o Sh. Harichandra Upadhyan, r/o Flat No. 106, Daisy Block 7, Amaravati Apartment, Baddi, Tehsil Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh-173205

¶11

……….Defendants

¶12

Advocates

¶13

Sh. Rajnish K Jindal, Counsel for the applicant bank Defendants- ex parte

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.31,41,542.77p with interest @8.5% per annum with monthly rests from 14.03.2022.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Canara Bank (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB

¶17

¶18

Act) for the recovery of Rs.31,41,542.77p with interest against M/s L M Enterprises and Others (defendants).

¶19

Defendant No.1 is a Partnership firm and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are its Partners. Bank’s case is that on 25.07.2018, it had granted loans of Rs.40.00 Lacs in the form of OCC Facility, Rs.15.00 Lacs in the form of Term loan Facility under CGTMSE Scheme and on 05.09.2020, Rs.1,48,737/- in the form of FITL Facility to the defendants for business purpose. Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 stood as guarantors. The loans were chargeable to interest @9.85% per annum with monthly rests. On 11.03.2022, a sum of Rs.31,41,542.77p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶20

On 29.04.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 20.10.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶21

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Pardeep Kumar Dogra, Chief Manager along with the loan and security 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 total loans of Rs.56,48,737/- and on 11.03.2022, a sum of Rs.31,41,542.77p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.31,41,542.77p (Rupees Thirty One Lakh Forty One Thousand Five Hundred Forty Two and Seventy Seven Paisa Only) with interest @8.50% per annum with monthly rests from 14.03.2022, till the date of

¶22

¶23

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 hypothecated assets/stocks/goods/book debts etc. as well as from the personal movable and immovable property of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 03.09.2025 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds 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: 29.07.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh (Additional charge)

Canara Bank v. M/S Lm Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Lm Enterprises

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

Hdfc Bank versus Mohd.Aarif

Punjab National Bank versus Sanjeev Kumar

Idbi Bank versus Dilpreet Singh

Mr Smirithy Sourab Shyamal And Anr. versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Shahar Abdul Jabbar versus South Indian Bank

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Ganpati Ji Mini Rice Mill and others