Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Future Tech Infrastructure Private Limited

DRT24 Sept 2025OA/757/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by the Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of Rs. 2.74 crores against several defendants who failed to repay a term loan and cash credit limit. The tribunal held the defendants jointly liable, granted interest, and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of recovery certificate for Rs. 2,74,86,594.60 plus 9% annual interest; direction to defendants to pay dues within two months; restraining order on alienation of assets.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Future Tech Infrastructure… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW

¶2

o Office action
proceeding taken with
date
O.A. No.757/2022
24.09.2025 The Judgment is signed and
pronounced on separate sheets. Separately
attached in 1 1 sheets.
Order be uploaded on the Tribunal’s
website.
(Dictated)
(\ /
(Pravas Kun ., Singh)
Presiding Officer
(MK)

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT LUCKNOW

¶4

Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer

¶5

Case No. Original Application No.757 of 2022

¶6

Dated: 24.09.2025

¶7

	Bankof Maharashtra,havingBranch at Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, UttarPradesh. .- Versus	.......Applicant-bank
1.	M/s Future Tech Infrastructure Private
	Limited,through its directors havingits registeredofficeat 1;tAddress:2/10,VineetI<hand,GomtiNagar, Lucknow, UttarPradesh. 2ndAddress: B-1218, Indira Nagar,Lucknow, UttarPradesh.
2.	Mrs.Sushila Srivastava(Directorof M/sFuture Tech Infrastructure Private Limited) W/oSri DeepeshChitrvanshi lst Address: House No.9, Khargapur,Geeta Nagar, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, UttarPradesh. 2ndAddress: Khasra No.118, Near Geetapur Chauraha, Khargapur, Gomti Nagar,Lucknow, 226010.
3.	Mrs. Kalpana Srivastava (Director of M/s Future Tech Infrastructure PrivateLimited) W/o Mr. SanjeevKumar Sinha. lstAddress: HouseNo.B-204,Amrapali Awadh Apartment, Indira Nagar, Near HAL,Lucknow, UttarPradesh. 2nd Address: E-2089, Rajajipuram Colony, Lucknow, UttarPradesh.
4	Mr. Vivek Chitravanshi S/o Sri SantoshKumar Srivastava ..	....Defendants
	1;t Address: 306, Ujala Apartment,Indira

¶8

¶9

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶10

Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

¶11

1. Mr. Sandeep Singh Pathod, Resident of L- 3/555, Vineet I<hand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

¶12

Smt. Sonam Srivastava W/o Mr. Vivek Chitravanshi lst Address: Resident of Khasra No.118, Near Geetapuri Chauraha, Khargapur, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow .

¶13

2-d Address: 306, Ujala Apartment, Indira Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. 7. Mr. Hariom Shishodia, Resident of C-128, New Colony, Devenderpuri, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.

¶14

Ld. Counsel for Applicant-bank: Shri Praveen Dwivedi, Advocate Ld. Counsel for the Defendant No.3: Shri Ritwick Rai, Advocate Ld. Counsel for the Defendant No.1,2,4 to 7: 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.2,74,86,594.60/- (Rupees Two Crore, Seventy Four Lacs, Eighty Six Thousand, Five Hundred Ninety Four and Paisa Sixty Only) together with pendent-lite and future interest, costs and other reliefs etc.

¶17

The brief facts of case:- the defendants No.1 is a Private Limited Company. The defendant Nos.2 & 3 are the Directors of Defendant No.1, the f’:I

¶18

defendant No.4 has become the director in 2021 and taken the liability of defendant No.1. The defendant company is engaged in the business of construction and the defendant no 2,3 and 4 are guarantors to the liability /

¶19

C r \ \ H r

¶20

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶21

taken by defendant noI.The defendant No.2 & 3 on behalf of the defendant No.1 had approached the applicant bank for grant of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.9.00 lacs vide its sanction letter dated 14.09.2015 on certain terms and conditions (Exhibit No. A-3 & 4) to this Original Application.

¶22

To secure aforesaid credit facility, defendants had executed and signed various security documents in favour of the Applicant-bank on 14.09.2015. The defendant No.4 had offered the security immovable property, a copy of mortgagor’s (Annexure 'A’ to Co CIR.5/94 DT.11/08/1994 NES MG6) executed by defendant No.2, 3 and 4 is being annexed herewith and marked as (Exhibit No. A-5 & 6) to this Original Application.

¶23

In order to further secure the repayment of the bank dues, the defendant No.4 created equitable mortgage in respect of property i.e. Equitable mortgage of House No.C-2167/8, admeasuring 49.30 square meter, situated at Sector C, Indira Nagar, Lucknow in the name of Mr. Vivek Chitravanshi in favour of the bank by deposit of title deed on 24.10.2015 (Exhibit A-7 & Exhibit No. A-8) to this Original Application.

¶24

That on 09.05.2017 the defendant No.2 & 3 on behalf of the defendant No.1 had passed a Board Resolution for the sanction of Term Loan and Cash Credit Limit and authorized defendant no.2 & 3 to complete all the formalities, a copy of which is being annexed as (Exhibit No.-9) to this Original Application.

¶25

The defendant No.2 & 3 on behalf of the defendant No.1 again approached the applicant bank for grant of Fresh Term Loan of Rs.90.00 lacs

O.A. No.757 of 2022

on 22.05.2017 and enhanced the Cash Credit Limit under SME of from 9.00 lacs to Rs.150.00, vide its Sanction letter dated 22.05.2017 (Exhibit No. A- 10) to this Original Application.

¶31

That the defendant No. 1 through defendant No.2 signed and executed the following loaning and security documents in favour of the applicant bank on 22.05.2017. The defendant No.2 & 3 has executed the “Guarantee for all Facilities except Agriculture Facilities- RF-154 X’, a copy of which is being annexed as (Exhibit No.11 & Exhibit No. A- 12) to this Original Application.

¶32

In order to. further secure the repayment of the bank dues, the defendant No.2 created equitable mortgage in respect of property i.e. Equitable mortgage of Commercial Plot No.20, Part of Khasra No.912B, admeasuring 662.453 square meter (in which the land measuring 264.693 has been released) situated at Viljage Bharwara, Ward – Chinhat, Lucknow in the name of M/s Futuretech Infrastructure Private Limited. Lot No.2 Equitable Mortgage of Plot in Abadi Open part of House No.105 admeasuring 557.620 square meter situate at Village Maleshemau, Pargana – Lucknow in the name ofFuturetech Infrastructure Private Limited. Lot No.3 Equitable Mortgage of Plot in Abadi Open part of House No.105 admeasuring 185.873 square meter situated at Village Maleshemau, Pargana – Lucknow in the name of IU! ! Futuertech Infrastructure Private Limited (Exhibit A-13 & Exhibit No. A-18) to this Original Application.

¶33

That the defendant No.4 on behalf of the defendant No.1 again approached the applicant bank for the restructure of the account the same has been considered and the account the same has been considered and the

¶34

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶35

¶36

applicant bank has restructured the account and sanctioned the following

¶37

credit facilities

¶38

SerialNo,	Facility	,imit
	Cash Credit	100.00 laos
2	WCTL	50.00lacs
	Term Loan	90.00laos
4	FITL	32.00lacs

¶39

A copy of the sanction letter dated 22.07.2019 is being

¶40

lexed herewith and

¶41

marked as (Exhibit No.19) to this Original Application.

¶42

That the defendant No.1 through defendant No.2 & 3 signed and executed the following loaning and security documents in favour of the ti"'I applicant bank on 22.08.2019. The defendant No.2, 4, 5, and 7 had executed the Agreement of Guarantee on 27.02.2017 (Exhibit No.20 & Exhibit No. A-

¶43

to this Original Application.

¶44

That thereafter, the defendant No.4 on behalf of the defendant No.1 again approached the applicant bank for the enhancement of Cash Credit Limit from Rs.100.00 lacs to Rs.150.00 laos and STL (Sort Term Loan) of Rs.25.00 lacs, vide its sanction letter dated 21.01.2021 & 27.01.2021, a copy of which is being annexed as (Exhibit No. A-25 & Exhibit No. A-26) to this Original Application.

¶45

That in order to secure the said credit facilities i.e. Credit Facilities of iB I Rs.150.00 lacs, the defendant No.1 through defendant No.4 following documents in favour of the applicant bank on 25.01.2021, a copy of which is being annexed as (Exhibit No. A-27) to this original Application.

¶46

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶47

That the defendant No.1 had already already created mortgage of following property by deposit of title deed no 23.05.2017. Thereafter, the IIB 1 defendant No.1 through defendant No.4 has further extended the liability by executing the following documents (Exhibit No. A-28 to Exhibit No. A-35) to this Original Application.

¶48

To avail the aforesaid credit facility, the Applicant-bank had opened four loan accounts in the name of defendant No. 1 in order to maintain the credit facilities.

¶49

After availing the aforesaid credit facility, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and also failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the loan agreement, consequently, the loan account of the defendant no.1/firm was classified as NPA on 29.05.2022 by the bank as per RBI guidelines (Exhibit No. A-36), thereafter the Applicant-bank issued Registered Legal Notice dated 15.07.2022 through its bank’s advocate to the defendants (Exhibit No. A-37), but, the defendants stated no-response and they failed to repay the same and the loan accounts of the defendants are still un-liquidated, hence, this Original Application has been instituted.

¶50

As per books of the bank maintained in the usual and ordinary course of banking business, an outstanding of Rs.2,74,86,594.60/- (Rupees Two it! Crore, Seventy Four Lacs, Eighty Six Thousand, Five Hundred Ninety Four and Paisa Sixty Only) including interest upto 29.05.2022, 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.

¶51

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶52

¶53

The Applicant-bank filed the Statement of loan Accounts. (Exhibit No.A-38 to

¶54

Exhibit No.A-42) to this Original Application.

¶55

The cause of action for filing the present application arose firstly on 14.09.2015, 22.05.2017 and 22.07.2019 when the aforesaid credit facility were sanctioned by the Applicant-bank and the same were availed by the defendants and necessary documents were executed by the defendants. The cause of action further arose on when Registered Legal Notice dated 15.07.2022 was sent to the defendants, recalling the entire outstanding dues and they failed to pay the same. That valuation report dated 22.11.2016 obtained by the applicant bank through bank’s approved valuer

¶56

by M. K. Goel of the property mentioned in para 3A of the Original Application (Exhibit No.A-43) to this Original Application.

¶57

The summons were served upon the defendants through registered post, the defendant No.1, 2, 4 to 7 did not appear before this Tribunal to contest their case. The defendant No.3 appeared and filed written submission alongwith WS and raised mainly following grounds, (A) it is stated the defendant No.4 is her close relative and he deceitfully inducted him as guarantor of the firm and further she remained a dummy director (B) She resigned from the company vide her letter dated 01.04.2018 when she was humiliated by the defendant No.4, the letter was forwarded to the

¶58

Registrar of Companies (copy filed vide annexure -1) (C) the two loans in which she has been shown as guarantor were further restructured by the

applicant bank

O.A. No.757 of 2022

1 have considered the submission of the defendant No.3 by mere tendering a resolution defendant No.3 cannot be absolved from the liability as guarantor. Merely restructure of the loan is not going to absolve the defendant No.3 from the liabilities. The restructure of the loan is not novation of the agreement since inception. It is only restructure for the payment of the loan. I have also considered that if any fraud has been committed with the defendant No.3 with a close relative the defendant No.4. She can’t be exonerated regarding here liabilities. The defendant No.3 is a qualified lady and any plea of non-est factu m will not be available to her. 20. 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 other 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

¶63

and pleading submitted by it.

¶64

In support of the case Shri Manish Kumar Singh, Senior Manager of the Applicant-bank has filed an affidavit.

¶65

On a careful scrutiny of the evidence on affidavit and Exhibits marked as Exhibit No.A-1 to Exhibit No.A-43, 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

¶66

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶67

¶68

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 Applicant-bank’s claim is within limitation against defendants, therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the dues.

¶69

Accordingly, the defendants 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 mortgaged property, hypothecated assets and personal assets/ properties of the defendants.

¶70

The Applicant-bank has claimed [email protected]% in Cash Credit Loan Account, [email protected]% in Term Loan, [email protected]% in FITL and [email protected]% in Short Term Loan (STL) per annum with monthly rest w.e.f. 30.05.2022 till the date of realization and costs. On the basis of foregoing discussion, interest of justice will be served if pendent- lite and future interest is granted @9% in above the loan accounts per annum with monthly rest reducing balance from the date of filing of the O.A. till the date of realization with costs.

¶71

1 find that the bank has proved the execution of loan documents and creation of mortgage in its favour. In the result, the Original Application succeeds as proceeded against the defendants with costs. The bank has proved the loan execution of loan documents in favour of the bank and

¶72

¶73

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶74

availment of credit facility. The liability of the defendant Nos.1 to 7 are joint and several and mortgaged property, hypothecated asset as well as the

¶75

personal properties are to be sold.

¶76

It is, therefore , ordered

¶77

(i) That the Original Application No.757 of 2022 of the Applicant bank for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs.2/74,86,594.60/- (Rupees Two Crore, Seventy Four Lacs, Eighty Six Thousand, Five Hundred Ninety Four and Paisa Sixty Only) along with the interest @9% per annum with monthly rest from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 04.08.2022 till the loan is fully liquidated and costs succeeds as proceeded against the defendants.

¶78

(ii) The defendant Nos.1 to 7 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. (iii) The Applicant–bank is entitled to recover aforesaid amount by sale of mortgage property & 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 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.

¶79

O.A. No.757 of 2022

¶80

¶81

(iV) The defendants are hereby 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.

¶82

(V) Let Recovery Certificate be issued immediately u/s 19(22) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 by fixing 16.12.2025 before R.o., DRT, Luckno'

¶83

(vi) The Applicant-bank is directed to file a memo of cost for preparing Recovery Certificate u/s 19(22) of the Recovery of Debts Bankruptcy Act, 1993 . Judgment is pronounced in the open court.

¶84

Dated: 24.09.2025

¶85

(Pravas Kumar SiXgh) Presiding Officer

¶86

(MK)

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Future Tech Infrastructure Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Future Tech Infrastructure Private Limited

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

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

Ms Yashansh Enterprises and Other versus Uco Bank

M S Hnt Manpower Services Ltd. versus Bank of Maharashtra