Allowed

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) v. M/S Shree Ji Garments

DRT24 Sept 2025OA/710/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal sanctioned the bank's original application ex parte for recovery of outstanding dues of Rs. 24.72 lacs along with pendent-lite and future interest as defendants failed to appear and contest the claim supported by loan documents.

What did the court decide?

_directions to repay Rs. 24.72 lacs + interest within 2 months; entitlement to sell assets if not paid; stay on property transfer; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) versus… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

¶2

LUCKNOW

¶3

Dateoforderor proceeding	Orderwithsignatureofcourt	Officeaction takenwith date
O.A.No.710/2024 24.09.2025	The Judgment is signed and pronounced on separate sheets. Separately attachedin07sheets. Order be uploaded on the Tribunal’s website. (Dictated) (PravasKum£rSingh) PresidingOfficer (Manoj)

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT LUCKNOW

¶5

Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer

¶6

Case No. Original Application No. 710 of 2024

¶7

Dated: 24.09.2025

¶8

Punjab National Bank, Branch Office at Begum Bridge, District Meerut, U.P. through Sri Rohit Kumar, Sr. Manager of the applicant bank.

¶9

, . . . . . . Applicant Bank

¶10

Versus

¶11

M/s Shree Ji Garments, behind Shop NO. 13-14, Near Shastri Nlurti, Lal Kurti, District Meerut, U.P. 250002, through its Sole Proprietor Sri Anil Maheshwari.

¶12

Sri Anil Maheshwari S/o Sri Amrit Lal, R/o 724 Brahmpuri, Kali Ka Mandir Wali Oali, Kabari Bazar, District Meerut, U.P.

¶13

. . . . . . defendants

¶14

Counsel for applicant-bank: Ms. Megha Pandey Advocate Counsel for the defendants: None.

¶15

JUDGEMENT

¶16

This Original Application has been filed by the applicant Bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for the recovery of Rs. 24,72,228.09 (Rupees Twenty-Four Laos, Seventy-Two Thousand, Two Hundred TwentyEight and Paise Nine only) together with pendent-lite and future

¶17

interest. costs and other reliefs etc

O.A. No. 710 of 2024

The brief facts of case:- the defendants No.1 is a proprietorship firm of which defendant no.2 is the sole proprietor. The defendant no.2 on behalf of defendant no.1 approached the applicant bank for financial assistance. The applicant bank considered the request of the defendants and sanctioned Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 9.50 lacs vide sanction letter dt. 12.06.2017 (Exhibit A..2).

¶23

To secure aforesaid credit facility, defendants had executed and signed various security documents in favour of the applicant-bank on 13.06.2017 loan and security documents.

¶24

The defendant no.2 on behalf of defendant no.1 approached the for enhancement of Cash Credit Facility from Rs. 9.50 Lacs to Rs. 23.00 Lacs. The applicant bank considered the request of the defendants and enhanced the Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 9.50 laos to Rs. 23.00 Lacs vide sanction /renewal letter dt. 03.04.2019 (Exhibit A-7) under the CGTMSE Scheme of Government of India.

¶25

To secure aforesaid enhanced credit facility, defendants had executed and signed various security documents in favour of the applicant-bank on 03.04.2019 loan and security documents. The defendant no.2 signed and executed Guarantee Agreement (Exhibit A- 11).

¶26

During the Covid -19 pandemic, defendant no.2 on behalf of defendant

¶27

no.1 approached the applicant bank for Term Loan under GECL Scheme. The applicant bank sanctioned Term Loan under GECL Scheme of Rs. 4.50 lacs vide sanction letter dt. 15.06.2020 (Exhibit A-

¶28

15 & 16). The defendants had executed and signed security documents

¶29

O.A. No. 710 of 2024

¶30

in favour of the applicant-bank on 15.06.2020 loan and security documents.

¶31

To avail the aforesaid credit facilities, the applicant-bank opened loan account in the name of the defendant No.1.

¶32

After availing the abovementioned credit facilities from the applicant-bank, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and also failed to comply with the terms and conditions of agreement as required in the matter. The applicant-bank made all possible efforts through oral persuasion and letters etc. The defendants was reminded many times by several applications by the applicant-.bank to regularize the loan account, but the defendants kept mum and have not come forward to make any efforts regarding payment of dues but the loan account of the defendants remained irregular and the defendants did not care to deposit the amount to adjust/ regularize the account despite various assurances given by defendants Consequently, the loan accounts of the defendant No.1 were classified as N.P.A. on 24.05.2023 by the applicant-bank as per RBI guidelines, therefore, the applicant-bark issued legal notice Dated 21.05.2024 (Exhibit No A- 20) to the defendants and requested for repayments, but the Defendants did not paid their heed to the same, hence, this Original Application has been instituted.

¶33

As per books of the bank maintained in the usual and ordinary course of banking business, an outstanding of Rs. 24,72,228.09 (Rupees Twenty Four Laos, Seventy Two Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty

¶34

4 O.A. No. 710 of 2024

¶35

Eight and Paise Nine only) including interest upto 30.04.2024, were lying due for payment, for which the defendants are jointly and severally liable to repay the same, which they did not pay despite repeated requests and demand. The applicant bank filed the Statement of loan Accounts. (Exhibit No. A-21 & 22)

¶36

The cause of action for filing the present application arose firstly when the aforesaid credit facility were sanctioned by the applicant Bank and the same were availed by the defendants and necessary documents

¶37

letter were executed by the defendants on 13.06.2017,06.02.2021,06.05.2022 and 1 5.06.2020 and balance

¶38

confirmation letter dated 12.06.2020 & 30.05.2023. The cause of action further arose on when demand Notice dt. 21.05.2024 was sent to the defendants, recalling the entire outstanding dues and they failed to pay the same.

¶39

The summons were served upon the defendant through registered post, but the defendants did not appear before the Tribunal to contest their case, hence the matter proceeded ex- parte against the defendants.

¶40

From the perusal of the record, it is evident that the defendants were provided with fair opportunities to contest the claim of the bank. As the defendants opted not to contest the case, so only point of consideration before this Tribunal is as to whether bank is legally entitled to the amount as claimed in Original Application on the basis of documents and pleading submitted by it.

¶41

5 O.A. No. 710 of 2024

¶42

In support of the case Sh. Rohit Kumar, Senior Manager of the

¶43

applicant bank has filed an affidavit.

¶44

On a careful scrutiny of the evidence on affidavit and Exhibits marked as Exhibit No. A-1 to Exhibit No. A-22, it is proved that defendants had availed the credit facilities from the applicant-bank by executing loan and security documents detailed as above in favour of the applicant-. Bank. A perusal of the application, evidence and documents relied upon clearly show that defendant had utilized the above loan facilities as granted to them. The applicant-bank had maintained the Books of account in the ordinary course of banking business showing disbursal of the loan amount. The Bank had also charged interest from time to time and the entries are relevant u/s 4 of the Banker Books of Evidence Act. It is also proved that the applicantbank’s claim is within limitation against defendants, therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the dues.

¶45

Accordingly, the defendants No. 1 & 2 are directed to pay the balance dues to the applicant bank within a period of 2 months from the date of judgement failing which the applicant bank will be entitled to sell the hypothecated assets and persona assets/ properties of the defendants.

¶46

The applicant-bank has claimed [email protected]% per annum with monthly rest w.e.f. 01.05.2024 till the date of realization and costs. On the basis of foregoing discussion, I am of opinion that cause for interest of justice will be served if pendent- lite and future interest is granted

¶47

O.A. No. 710 of 2024

¶48

@9% per annum with monthly rate reducing balance from the date of filing of the O.A. till the date of realization with costs.

¶49

1 find that the bank has proved execution of loan documents in its favour. In the result, the Original Application succeeds as exparte against the defendant No. 1 & 2 with costs. The liability of the defendant No. 1 & 2 are joint and several and hypothecated asset as well as the personal properties are to be sold.

¶50

It is, therefore , ordered

¶51

(i) That the Original Application No.710 of 2024 of the applicant bank for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs. 24,72,228.09 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs, Seventy Two Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty Eight and Paise Nine only) along with the interest @ 9% per annum with monthly rest from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 02.07.2024 till the loan is fully liquidated and costs succeeds exparte against the defendant No. 1 & 2.

¶52

(ii) The defendants are directed to pay the dues within a period of two months from the date of judgement, failing which the applicant bank will be entitled to recover the same from the secured assets, personal movables and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶53

(iii) The applicant–bank is entitled to recover aforesaid amount by sale of hypothecated assets (if not sold earlier under the provision of the S.A.R.F.A.E.S.I. Act 2002). The amount, if any already I \W

¶54

1 1

¶55

O. A. No. 710 of 2024

¶56

¶57

recovered by sale of any hypothecated assets or otherwise shall be recoverable, if the dues of the applicant bank still remain unsatisfied, the same shall be recovered by attachment and sale of the personal movable assets of the defendant jointly and severally .

¶58

(iv) The defendants are here by restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way dealing with their properties/estates without first paying the claim of the applicant-bank.

¶59

(V) Let Recovery Certificate be issued immediately u/s 19(22) of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993 by fixing 16.12.2025 before Recovery Officer, DRT, Lucknow. Judgement is pronounced in the open court.

¶60

Dated: 24.09.2025

¶61

'gingh) Presiding Officer

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) v. M/S Shree Ji Garments

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) v. M/S Shree Ji Garments

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

Canara Bank versus M/S Triveni Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M/S Shri Durga Rice Mill

Punjab National Bank versus Al Muskan Traders

Ms Yashansh Enterprises and Other versus Uco Bank

M S Hnt Manpower Services Ltd. versus Bank of Maharashtra

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Future Tech Infrastructure Private Limited