Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Aditya Motors

DRT12 Sept 2025TA/2494/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery. The court found the defendants' case unrebutted, confirmed the NPA status of the loan, and directed payment of the outstanding sum with interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 37,20,487/- with interest within 30 days or face recovery from sale of hypothecated and mortgaged properties; recovery certificate to be issued.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Aditya Motors — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 2494 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.2494 of 2022

¶5

Bank of Baroda Noida Complex, Noida Sector-18, Uttar Pradesh Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s Aditya Motors Through its Sole Proprietor Shop no.10, Plot no.20 Parmesh Tower Community Centre Karkardooma, Delhi-110092

¶8

Sh. Ashok Kumar s/o Shatranjan Kumar R/o E-67, South Anarkali Delhi-110051

¶9

Mrs. Sampa w/o Sh. Shatranjan Kumar E-67, South Anarkali Delhi-110051

¶10

Present: Mr. Shivam Gupta, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶11

Date of Institution: 09.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 12.09.2025

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-II, Delhi on 09.01.2020 and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Sh. Amit Tiwary, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of 5d

¶14

¶15

T.A. No. 2494 of 2022

¶16

Rs.37,20,487/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Twenty Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Seven only) along with pendentelite and future interest @9.65% per annum with monthly rests alongwith 2% penal interest from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization.

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 being proprietorship concern, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit hypothecation facility for a sum of Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs only) on 31.01.2017 against hypothecation of assets purchased out of bank finance, current assets and continuing security of mortgage property being Apartment No.H.No.163, Bhatnagar CHBS Ltd., Chitra Vihar, Delhi owned by defendant no.2 & 3 who stood as guarantors for the credit facility sanctioned by the applicant bank.

¶18

In order to avail the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted Loan application and executed Loan Agreement cum Hypothecation Deed, Undertaking, Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds and Letter of Guarantee by defendant no.2 and 3 with the applicant bank on 01.02.2017

¶19

In order to secure the loan facility, the defendant no.2 & 3 created mortgage of property being Apartment No.163, Bhatnagar CHBS Ltd., Chitra Vihar, Delhi-110092 with the applicant bank by executing Memorandum by depositing title deeds on 01.02.2017.

¶20

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to deposit the installments and interest in the account in order to

¶21

sd-

¶22

¶23

T.A. No. 2494 of 2022

¶24

regularize the accounts with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the accounts as NPA on 30.07.2018 as per RBI guidelines but the defendants neglected the same and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶25

Notice under Notices under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 06.08.2018 was to the defendants calling upon them to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank but the defendants did not clear the dues.

¶26

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 14.02.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal as not appeared before the Tribunal.

¶27

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its documents through Sh. Amit Tiwary, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Sanction Letter Exhibit AW1/1, Loan Agreement cum Hypothecation Deed Exhibit AW1/2, Undertaking Exhibit AW1/3, Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds Exhibit AW1/4, Letter of Guarantee Exhibit AW1/5, Statement of Accounts Exhibit AW1/6, Notice u/s 13(2) along with Postal Receipts marked as Exhibit AW1/7.

¶28

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the

¶29

¶30

¶31

T.A. No. 2494 of 2022

¶32

applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶33

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.

¶34

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

¶35

ORDER

¶36

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.37,20,487/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Twenty Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Seven only) together with pendentelite and future interest @9.65% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs; failing which the amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated assets financed and mortgaged Apartment no.163, Bhatnagar CHBS Ltd., Chitra Vihar, Delhi-110092. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties 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 10.11.2025.

¶39

¶40

T.A. No. 2494 of 2022

¶41

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

¶42

(GOVIND 6ALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶43

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 12.09.2025

¶44

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Aditya Motors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Aditya Motors

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

Joji Esthaphan versus Axis Bank

Canara Bank versus Bharat Kumar Gupta

Indian Bank versus M/S Ujjwala Food Industries

Union Bank of India versus Smt Seema

Punjab National Bank versus Reshu Devi and Ors.

Idbi Bank versus Sh Avtar Singh