Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Saluja Enterprises

DRT21 Feb 2025OA/983/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by Punjab National Bank against M/s Saluja Enterprises and Smt. Meenakshi Saluja for recovery of an outstanding loan of Rs.36,82,089.43. The order declared the defendants liable to pay the principal along with future interest at 8% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.36,82,089.43 jointly and severally with interest at 8% per annum; Issuance of Recovery Certificate; Liberty to enforce claim through sale of assets.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Saluja Enterprises — DRT (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.983/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 27.04.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 21.02.2025

¶6

Punjab National Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having the Head Office at Plot No.4, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 and Branch amongst others oneat Village Barewal Awana, District Ludhiana through Sh. Sonu, Chief Manager Punjab National Bank Circle Sastra Center, Ludhiana West, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana and duly constituted Attorney of the applicant .

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Saluja Enterprises, Dyeing complex, Tajpur Road, Opp. Central jail, Ludhiana through its proprietor Smt. Meenakshi Saluja.

¶10

Smt Meenakshi Saluja W/o Sh. Raman Saluja R/O House No. 19, Mahavir Nagar Opp. MBD Mall, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶11

Second Address: Smt. Meenakshi Saluja W/o Sh. Raman Saluja, Flat No. B-6, Crosswind, apartments, Opp. Lodhi Club Ludhiana.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. P.S. Sobti, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.36,82,089.43p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Eighty

¶17

¶18

Nine And Paisa Forty Three only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sonu, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 22.11.2014, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 & 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of CC Limit covered under CGTMSE of Rs.9.00 Lacs and further for its enhancement to Rs.15.00 Lacs. Thereafter again defendants approached the applicant for its enhancement to Rs.25.00 Lacs. 3. The applicant sanctioned CC Limit covered under CGTMSE of Rs.9.00 Lacs and further for its enhancement to Rs.15.00 Lacs. Thereafter again defendants approached the applicant for its enhancement to Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 29.07.2010 & 19.01.2012, 11.10.2013 which are Annexures A2, A4 and A6 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 had hypothecated its movable properties/assets i.e. the stock of raw material, corrugated card board boxes etc. vide Hypothecation of goods & books debts dated 29.07.2010, 19.01.2012 & 11.10.2013, which are Annexures A3, A5 & A7 to this OA Documents executed:- Letter of undertaking dated 11.10.2013, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Legal notice dated 06.06.2019 , which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Balance & Confirmation letters dated 18.05.2016 and 18.04.2019, which are Annexures A10 & A11 to this OA and Copy of Statement of account along with Order of Hon’bles Supreme, which are Annexures A12 & A13 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account there was a debit of Rs.36,82,089.43p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶20

¶21

6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded
04.02.2025.
7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh Sonu, Chief Manager,Punjab
National Bank, has been filed.
8. Heard arguments and perused record.
9. It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant
bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all theAnnexure A1 to A13to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant
bank 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 bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.36,82,089.43p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Eighty Two thousand
Eighty Nine And Paisa Forty Three only) along with interest from the
defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present
Original Application till realization of the account.
10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned,
the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.65%p.a. along with penal interest @2.00%p.a. with monthly rests from 01.04.2022 till the
realization.
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 mortgaged property, undertaking of
the defendant, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while 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

¶22

¶23

account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶24

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.36,82,089.43p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Eighty Two thousand Eighty Nine And Paisa Forty Three 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 bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank 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.

¶25

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶26

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶27

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 26.03.2025.

¶28

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: 21.02.2025

¶29

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Saluja Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Saluja 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 Limited versus Bhagwan Dass

The Federal Bank Limited versus Jaspal Singh

Central Bank of India versus Smt. Anuradha Devi

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Darshan Singh

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Amandeep Singh

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Kulwinder Kaur