Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Giriraj Industries and Anr.

DRT20 Dec 2025TA/2267/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 2.82 crores along with interest and costs against absent defendants, confirming the debt based on unrebutted documentary evidence and authorizing recovery via hypothecated assets or property sale.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs. 2,82,72,999.02 with interest at 9.40% p.a. within 30 days; recovery from hypothecated assets or property sale if unpaid; issuance of recovery certificate.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Giriraj Industries and Anr. — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 2267 of 2022

¶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.2267 of 2022

¶5

Punjab National Bank

¶6

(e-Oriental Bank of Commerce)

¶7

Circle Sastra Centre, East Delhi 1st Floor, Commercial Shopping Complex, Pocket-E, Mayur Vihar Phase II Delhi-110091

¶8

Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

M/s Giriraj Industries Through its Proprietor Mr. Nitin Goyal s/o Mr. Rajesh Goyal H.No.295/8, Basement, Sector-6, IMT Manesar, Gurugram, Haryana-122052

¶11

Mr. Nitin Goyal s/o Mr. Rajesh Goyal Prop. M/s Giriraj industries

¶12

H.No. 295/8, Basement, Sector-6, MT Manesar, Gurugram, Haryana-122052

¶13

Also at:

¶14

Mr. Nitin Goyal s/o Mr. Rajesh Goyal H-70/3, Prem Nagar-I, Kirari Suleman Nagar, Delhi-110086 Defendants

¶15

Present: Shri Santosh Kumar Rout, Counsel for the applicant Bank

¶16

Date of Reserve: 08.12.2025

¶17

Date of Pronouncement: 20.12.2025

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 21.12.2021 before DRT-II, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-1, Delhi through Sh. Akhouri Binay, authorized

¶20

T.A. No. 2267 of 2022

¶21

representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.2,82,72,999.02 (Rupees Two Crores Eighty Two Lacs Seventy Two Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Nine and paisa Two only) as on 22.11.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @7.40% per annum with monthly rests plus @2% penal interest from 23.11.2021 till the date of realization along with costs.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 through its proprietor being defendant no.2 vide loan application dated 26.02.2019 along with registration number etc., the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility for Rs.200.00 Lacs (Rupees Two Crores only) @Benchmark MCLR 1 year+2% spread on monthly basis covered under CGTMSE scheme on 05.03.2019 against hypothecation of stocks and debtors and other current assets of defendant no.1. Further, on the request of the defendants, the applicant bank sanctioned Working Capital Term Loan under GECL for Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lacs only) on 24.07.2020 @7.50% per annum against extension of charge on entire present and future current assets of the firm.

¶23

In order to avail the loan facilities, the defendant no.1 submitted loan application & executed Sole Proprietorship Letter (Doc-21), Agreement of Hypothecation of Assets (Doc1), Common Agreement (Doc-38), Collection of unveiled Limits Annexure-I, Undertakings, Notarized Affidavit of Legal Heirs, Application for GECL, Master Agreement (PNB-2057), Demand Promissory Note (PNB-728), Agreement for WCTL (PNB-1252), Hypothecation Agreement (PNB-1041) in favour of the applicant bank on 05.03.2019 and 10.08.2020.

¶24

T.A. No. 2267 of 2022

¶25

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 maintain financial discipline and committed defaults in repayment of loan including required documents for renewal of the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank issued recall notice dated 26.03.2021 but defendants failed to regularize the account. The applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.03.2021 but defendants failed, neglected and avoided paying overdue amount, hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶26

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 16.04.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendants.

¶27

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Akhouri Binay, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as General Power of Attorney of AR, Copy of Amalgamation scheme, Registration Certificate, Application for MSME Loans, Sanction Letter, Sole Proprietorship Letter, Stamped Agreement for Hypothecation of Assets, Stamped Common Agreement, Collection of Unavailed Limits, Undertakings, Affidavit, Application for GECL Loan, Sanction Letter for GECL, Demand Promissory Note, Agreement for WCTL, Hypothecation Agreement, Master Agreement, Recall Notice, Statement of Account with Certificate under Section 2A

¶28

T.A. No. 2267 of 2022

¶29

of Bankers' Books Evidence Act, Certificate of Outstanding amount marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/22.

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

ORDER

¶34

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.2,82,72,999.02 (Rupees Two Crore Eighty Two Lacs Seventy Two Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Nine and Paisa Two only) together with pendentelite and future interest @9.40% per annum with monthly rests from 23.11.2021 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stock, book debts and current assets etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

T.A. No. 2267 of 2022

¶38

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 18.02.2026.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 20.12.2025

¶42

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Giriraj Industries and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Giriraj Industries and Anr.

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

Icici Bank Limited versus I P Electricals and Hardware Company

State Bank of India versus Manish Kumar Purohit

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Brijlal Udyog

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Nirmala Printer and Stationers

Canara Bank versus Siddharth Gandhi

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Sarthak Pack Well