Allowed

Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank) v. M/S Fox International Publication LLP

DRT5 Apr 2025TA/2456/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Bank of Baroda for recovery of Rs.30,87,571.90 plus interest from defendants who failed to repay a working capital loan. In the absence of the respondents, the Tribunal framed evidence, found the bank's case proved, and ordered payment and a sale of mortgaged assets.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs.30,87,571.90 plus interest and costs; recovery from sale of hypothecated and mortgaged stocks and property.

Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank) versus M/S Fox… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.2456 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. 2456 of 2022

¶5

Bank of Baroda (e-Vijaya Bank) House no.285, Main road Ladpur, Delhi-110081

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.^{M/s Fox International Publications LLP} Through Sh.Rajnish Kapur & Smt.Seema Kapur (Partners) AG 220-221, Ground Floor Shalimar Bagh New Delhi-110088

¶9

Sh.Rajnish Kapur AG 222, Shalimar Bagh New Delhi-110088

¶10

Ms. Seema Kapur AG 222, Shalimar Bagh New Delhi-110088

¶11

Sh.Naman Kapur AG 222, Shalimar bagh New Delhi-110088 5. Sh.Manoj Sachdeva 3335, 1st floor, Mahindra Park, Defendants Rani Bagh, Delhi-110034

¶12

Present: Sh.Sumit Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 24.12.2019

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 05.04.2025

¶14

T.A. No.2456 of 2022

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before �^{Delhi on 24.12.2019 & then transferred} to DRT-I, Delhi through Sh.Vikas Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.30,87,571.90^(Rupees Thirty Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Seventy One and paisa Ninety only) as along with pendentelite and future interest @11.25% per annum along with 2% penal interest with monthly rest from date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs. Further, the name of Sh.Ashwini Atri was substituted as authorized representative in place of Sh.Manish Tripathi and Sh.Vikas Kumar, erstwhile ARs for the applicant bank.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 being partnership LLP concern of defendant no.2 and 3 vide their application dated 01.06.2017, the applicant bank sanctioned Working Capital Loan of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lacs only) on 08.06.2017 @11.25% interest per annum against hypothecation of stock in trade, book debts and mortgage of property for the business of manufacturing and marketing of educational books. The Defendant no.2 to 5 stood as guarantors for the loan facility sanctioned in favor of the defendant no.1 by the applicant bank.

¶18

That in order to avail the loan facility, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Sanction Letter, Loan

¶19

T.A. No.2456 of 2022

¶20

Agreement cum Hypothecation Deed for Priority/Non Priority Sector Advances, Letter of Guarantees in favour of the applicant bank on 08.06.2017.

¶21

In order to secure the loan facility, the defendants hypothecated the stocks and book debts with applicant bank and defendant no.3 created equitable mortgage of property consisting of parking of AG 220-221, Ground Floor, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi. (as per sanction letter) by deposit of property documents on 08.06.2017.

¶22

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants miserably failed to repay the loan amount and failed to maintain financial discipline as per terms and conditions despite various notices and reminders. The applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 30.09.2019 as per extant RBI guidelines and sent various reminders to the defendants to clear the dues but no response. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues from the defendants

¶23

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service through publication in newspapers, the defendants haVe chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 09.12.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶24

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh.Vikas Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Bank Resolution Ex.PW-1/1, Sanction Letter

fq/-

T.A. No.2456 of 2022

Ex.PW-1/2, Loan Agreement cum Hypothecation Deed Ex.PW1/3, Letter of Guarantees Ex.PW-1/3 to Ex.PW-1/5, Statement of Account Ex.PW-1/6, Calculation Sheet Ex.PW-1/7, Certificate under Banker's Books of Evidence Act Ex.PW-1/8.

¶29

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.

¶30

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.

¶31

In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶32

ORDER

¶33

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.30,87,571.90/- (Rupees Thirty Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Seventy One and Paisa Ninety only) along with pendentelite and future interest @13.25% per annum with monthly rests and costs from date of filing of this application failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated stocks, book debts and mortgaged property parking of AG 220-221, Ground Floor, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi. In case of shortfall, the same shall be

¶34

¶35

T.A. No.2456 of 2022

¶36

recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶37

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

¶38

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery} Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 04.06.2025

¶39

(IV)^{Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be}

¶40

sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶41

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

¶42

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 05.04.2025

Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank) v. M/S Fox International Publication LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank) v. M/S Fox International Publication LLP

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 Prabhat Yadav

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Om Trading

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus M/s Priya Fashion

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus M/S Sharma Enterprises

Bank of Baroda (E-Vijaya Bank) versus Mr. Ashok Kumar

Canara Bank versus M/S Inasco India