Allowed

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Aakarshan Designer Saree

DRT29 Dec 2025OA/76/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues totaling approx Rs.27.46 Lakhs. The debt arose from an overdraft and term loan which were mismanaged by the respondents. The respondents were absent, and the bank's evidence was found unrebutted.

What did the court decide?

Direct recovery of Rs. 27,46,110.62 plus pendentlite interest and costs from the sale of stocks, current assets, and mortgaged property within 30 days.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Aakarshan Designer… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

O.A. No. 76 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No.76 of 2023

¶5

Punjab and Sind Bank Chawri Bazar, Hauz Qazi New Delhi-110006

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Aakarshan Designer Saree Through its proprietor Sh. Prakash Rastogi 105/5, Moti Bazar, First floor Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006

¶9

Also at:

¶10

M/s Aakarshan Designer Saree Through its proprietor Sh. Prakash Rastogi 55, Main road, Opposite Natraj Bhalla Chandni Chowk, New Delhi-110006

¶11

Also at:

¶12

M/s Aakarshan Designer Saree Through its proprietor Sh. Prakash Rastogi House No.C-12/490, C-12 Block, Yamuna Vihar, Garhi Mendu, Delhi-110053

¶13

Also at:

¶14

M/s Aakarshan Designer Saree Through its proprietor Sh. Prakash Rastogi House no.12, 2nd floor, Gali No.3A Shri Ram Marg, Maujpur, Delhi-110053

¶15

Mrs. Shilpi Gupta w/o Sh. Prakash Rastogi House no.12, Second Floor, Gali no.3A Shriram marg, Maujpur, Delhi-110053 Defendants

¶16

Present: Ms. Rishabh Jain alongwith Mr. Jhataklal Yadav, Counsels for the applicant bank

¶17

Date of Reserve: 17.12.2025

¶18

Date of Pronouncement: 29.12.2025

O.A. No. 76 of 2023

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 06.12.2022 through Sh. Mohammad Ahmad, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,46,110.62 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Forty Six Thousand One Hundred Ten & paisa Sixty Two only) as on 12.10.2022, out of which Rs.25,50,348/- in ODP account along with pendentelite interest @11.51% per annum and Rs.1,95,762.62 in FITL a/c along with pendentelite interest @10.60% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs together with @2% penal interest.

¶23

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 through its proprietor and defendant no.2 as guarantor, the applicant bank sanctioned ODP limit for Rs.24,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs only) on 17.10.2019 @10.10°/0 interest per annum for purchase of stocks and meeting liquidity mismatch against hypothecation of current assets and mortgage of property. Further, the applicant bank granted Funded Interest Term Loan for a sum of Rs.1,10,197/on 20.09.2020due to Covid 19 guidelines.

¶24

In order to avail the loan facilities, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Overdraft Agreement, Deed of Guarantee, Deed of Hypothecation, Memorandum of Deposit of Title deeds with the applicant bank on 19.10.2019.

¶25

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage of Property bearing No.12, in sd-

¶26

¶27

O.A. No. 76 of 2023

¶28

Second Floor without roof rights, measuring 100 sq. yards, out of Khasra no.714/200/1 and 520/219/220/221 situated at Village Maujpur, Gali No.3A, Shree Ram Marg, Maujpur, Ilaqua Shandara, Delhi having Registration no.2019, Book No.1, Volume no.4291 on Page no.1 to 8 on 3rd December 2010 by depositing title deeds with applicant bank.

¶29

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to regularize the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.012021 as per RBI guidelines and issued notice dated 06.04.2021 under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act but the defendants neglected the same and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶30

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 25.09.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

¶31

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Mohammad Ahmed, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents Authorization letter, Sanction letter, Sale deed, Overdraft agreement, Deed of Guarantee, Undertakings, Deed of Hypothecation, Memorandum of

¶32

¶33

O.A. No. 76 of 2023

¶34

Deposit of Title deeds, Notice under section 13(2), Statement of Account marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/10.

¶35

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶36

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶37

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶38

ORDER

¶39

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.27,46,110.62 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Forty Six Thousand One Hundred Ten & paisa Sixty Two only) as on 12.10.2022, out of which Rs.25,50,348/- in ODP account along with pendentelite interest @11.51% per annum and Rs.1,95,762.62 in FITL a/c along with pendentelite interest @10.60% per annum with monthly rests from 12.10.2022 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the amount shall be recovered from sale of stock, current assets etc. and from sale of mortgaged Property bearing No.12, Second Floor without roof rights, measuring 100 sq. yards, out of Khasra no.714/200/1 and 520/219/220/221 situated at Village

¶40

¶41

O.A. No. 76 of 2023

¶42

Maujpur, Gali No.3A, Shree Ram Marg, Maujpur, Ilaqua Shandara, Delhi having Registration no.2019, Book No.1, Volume no.4291 on Page no.1 to 8. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶43

(II)^{The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent} to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶44

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery} Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 27.02.2026.

¶45

(IV)^{Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be} sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶46

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶47

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 29.12.2025

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Aakarshan Designer Saree

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Aakarshan Designer Saree

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

Jitendra Natthuji Chavhan versus Arvind Sahakari Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Pristine Facility and Management Services Pvt. Lts

Rare Asset Reconstruction Private Limited versus Ms Narayana Processed Food Pvt. Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus Pradeep Kumar

Central Bank of India versus Dinesh Chand Alias Dinesh Kumar

Bank of India versus Komal Sharma