Allowed

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. M/S Shreya Polymers Pvt. Ltd.

DRT6 Mar 2025TA/1106/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I allowed Union Bank of India's original application for recovery against Shreya Polymers Pvt.Ltd. and directors for a defaulted loan of Rs.30.15 lacs with interest, ordering payment within 30 days and issuance of recovery certificate upon defaults.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs.30,15,639.10 with interest within 30 days; recovery from sale of hypothecated and other properties upon failure; issuance of recovery certificate directed to Recovery Officer.

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus M/S Shreya… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.1106 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

T.A. No. 1106 of 2023

¶5

Union Bank of India

¶6

(E-Corporation Bank) Deep Memorial Public School Block A, Ramprastha, Ghaziabad, UP

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Shreya Polymers Pvt.Ltd. Through its directors Shri Sunil Kumar s/o Om Dutt

¶10

202, 2nd Floor, Shri Ganesh Business Centre E-35, Jawahar Park, Laxmi Nagar Delhi-110092

¶11

Corporate Office at: 59/2/10, Site IV Industrial Area Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP-201010

¶12

Also at:

¶13

G-514, MG Road Industrial Opp. Hindustan Coca Cola Ghaziabad, UP-201011

¶14

Also at:

¶15

C-569 A, Brij Vihar, Post Chander Nagar Ghaziabad, UP-201011

¶16

Also at:

¶17

C-32B, Brij Vihar, Post Chander Nagar Ghaziabad, UP-201011

¶18

Sh. Sunil Kumar s/o Om Dutt C-569 A, Brij Vihar, Post Chander Nagar Ghaziabad, UP-201011

¶19

Also at:

¶20

C-32B, Brij Vihar, Post Chander Nagar Ghaziabad, UP-201011 5441-

¶21

T.A. No.1106 of 2023

¶22

Ms. Geeta Singh w/o Sh. Sunil Kumar C-569 A, Brij Vihar, Post Chander Nagar Ghaziabad, UP-201011

¶23

Also at:

¶24

C-32B, Brij Vihar, Post Chander Nagar Ghaziabad, UP-201011 Defendants

¶25

Present: Shri Samrendra Kumar, Counsel for applicant bank

¶26

Date of Institution: 25.10.2021

¶27

Date of Pronouncement: 06.03.2025

¶28

FINAL ORDER

¶29

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 25.10.2021 before DRT-II, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I, Delhi through Shri Arun Kumar Pandey, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 read with Rule 8 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Rules 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.30,15,639.10 (Rupees Thirty Lacs Fifteen Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Nine & paisa Ten only) as on 31.07.2021 together with pendentelite and future interest @11.43% per annum with monthly rest from 01.08.2021 till the date of realization and costs.

¶30

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant no.1 through defendant no.2 and 3 being directors / directors, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit limit of Rs.12.00 lacs as working capital on 14.12.2011 wh - ch was enhanced from time to time lastly for Rs.31.00 lacs on 29.03.2017 against hypothecation of stocks, book debts and

¶31

5V-

¶32

T.A. No.1106 of 2023

¶33

currents assets @9.45% interest per annum compounded monthly plus 2% penal interest on the overdue amount.

¶34

That in order to avail the loan facility, the defendants executed Request for Cash Credit Limit, Demand Promissory Notes, Take Delivery Letters to DPN, Guarantee Agreements, Common Deeds of Hypothecation, Letter of Undertaking and General Power of Attorney on 14.12.2011, 21.10.2014 and 29.03.2017 in favour of application bank.

¶35

In order to secure the credit facility, the defendants hypothecated stocks, book debt and currents assets of defendant no.1 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶36

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline, committed defaults in repayment of interest, penal interest and other charges as per banking norms. As the defendants failed to regularize the account despite notice & personal visits, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA as per prudential norms as per RBI guidelines and issued legal demand notice on 25.09.2021 for Rs.30,15,639.10 but no response. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶37

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 02.11.2023, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶38

T.A. No.1106 of 2023

¶39

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Arun Kumar Pandey, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Gazette Notification Ex.AW1/1A, Power of Attorney Ex.AW1/1A, CSI dated 14.12.2011, 06.07.2013 & 20 02.015 Ex.AW1/2 to Ex.AW1/4, Demand Promissory Note Ex.AW1/5 & AW1/9, Take Delivery Letter to DPN Ex.AW1/6 & AW1/10, Board Resolution Ex.AW1/7A, Request for Cash Credit Limit Ex.AW1/8, Guarantee Agreement Ex.AW1/11, Common Deed of Hypothecation Ex.AW1/12, Letter of Undertaking Ex.AW1/13, General Power of Attorney Ex.AW1/14, Demand Notice dated 25.09.2021 Ex.AW1/15, Postal Receipts Ex.AW1/16, Rate of Interest Certificate Ex.AW1/17.

¶40

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 proved.

¶41

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.

¶42

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

¶43

T.A. No.1106 of 2023

¶44

ORDER

¶45

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.30,15,639.10 (Rupees Thirty Lacs Fifteen Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Nine & paisa Ten only) as on 31.07.2021 together with pendentelite and future interest @11.45% per annum with monthly rests from 01.08.2021 till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stocks, book debts and current assets etc. of defendant no.1. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶46

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

¶47

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 05.05.2025.

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 06.03.2025

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. M/S Shreya Polymers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. M/S Shreya Polymers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Archana Kumari and Others versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/S Radhe Radhe Enterprises

Msmodgil Filling Station versus Punjab National Bank

Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Ltd. versus Mrs. Sunita Kumar

Union Bank of India (E-Andhra Bank) versus M/S R.S.Electrical

Pushpa Bakery versus Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank