Allowed

Canara Bank v. Gupta Agencies and Others

DRT10 Sept 2025OA/835/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank against M/s Gupta Agencies and others for recovery of Rs.26,87,247.10p. The Tribunal issued a Recovery Certificate, permitted enforcement under SARFAESI Act provisions, and adjusted the interest rate to 8.00%p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.26,87,247.10p plus interest @8.00%p.a.; Issuance of Recovery Certificate; Permission to recover through SARFAESI Act processes.

Canara Bank versus Gupta Agencies and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.835/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 30.06.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 10.09.2025

¶6

Canara Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its head office at 112, J.C. Road, Bangalore, and inter alia, Branch Office at Kailash Nagar Ludhiana, Punjab 181162 through Sh. Lovish Kumar, Branch Manager, Principal Officer and General Attorney.

¶7

.. … …..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Gupta Agencies, a sole proprietorship concern situated at East Garden 15, Malhotra Colony Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana through its proprietor Sh.Ved Parkash S/o Sh. Ram Saroop.

¶10

Sh.Ved Parkash, S/o Sh.Ram Saroop, R/o East Garden 15, Malhotra Colony, Jassian Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana.

¶11

Smt. Sarita w/o Sh.Ved Parkash, R/o East Garden, Malhotra Colony, Village Jassian, Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Gulshan Mehta, Advocate for Applicant

¶15

Defendants already ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.26,87,247.10p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven & Ten Paise Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Lovish Kumar, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 21.01.2021, which is Annexure A1 tothis OA.

¶18

2 OA/835/2025 CANARA BANK Vs M/S GUPTA AGENCIES AND OTHERS

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of Overdraft Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 31.03.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the Overdraft Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 31.03.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant No. 3 had mortgaged her immovable properties i.e. Residential House build up on plot no. 18 measuring 50 sq. yards situated at Village Jassian, Hadbast No.101, Locality known as East Garden, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide equitable mortgage of Sale Deed No. 2019-20/101/1/19164 dated 17.03.2020, along with its translation, which is Annexure A10 to this OA, Letter evidencing Deposits of title deeds dated 30.03.2023 and Affidavit, which are to A12 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed:- Letter of Proprietorship, Cash Credit arrangement, DP Note, Letter of undertaking, Guarantee agreement, Guarantee covering letter all dated 31.03.2023, which are Annexures A4 to A9 to this OA; Recall notice dated 11.06.2025, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Statement of account duly certified, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶23

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.26,87,247.10p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

3 OA/835/2025 CANARA BANK Vs M/S GUPTA AGENCIES AND OTHERS

¶25

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex- parte 25.08.2025.

¶26

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Lovish Kumar, Branch Manager, Canara Bank, has been filed.

¶27

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶28

It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A14 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,87,247.10p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven & Ten Paise Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶29

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.50%p.a. along with 2% penal interest with monthly rests from 01.06.2025 till the realization.

¶30

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while

¶31

4 OA/835/2025 CANARA BANK Vs M/S GUPTA AGENCIES AND OTHERS

¶32

exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.26,87,247.10p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven & Ten Paise Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated assets of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 01.10.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 10.09.2025. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Gupta Agencies and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Gupta Agencies and Others

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S the Lady Fashion and Another

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus M/S Ludhiana Dairy and Others

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sh. Lavish Sharda and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Messrs Sharman Woollens and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Mangal Singh

Union Bank of India versus Nitin Kumar and Another