Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Yes Tour

DRT13 Nov 2025TA/2722/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 20.37 lakhs and interest against two borrowers who defaulted on vehicle loans. The court noted the defendants' absence, found the bank's case proved beyond reasonable doubt, and directed payment or recovery from hypothecated vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Awarded recovery of Rs. 20,37,899/- plus interest; directed sale of hypothecated vehicles in case of shortfall; issued recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Yes Tour — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A No.2722 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.2722 of 2022

¶5

Union Bank of India

¶6

(e-Corporation Bank) Nutan Vidya Mandir Sr.Sec. School G.T.B. Enclave, Dilshad Garden Delhi-110093 Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Yes Tours

¶9

Through its Proprietor Mr. Bhajan Lal B-2/11, Street no.1 Subhash Kansal Marg Harsh Vihar, Delhi-110093

¶10

Mr. Bhajan Lal

¶11

B-2/11, Street no.1 Subhash Kansal Marg Harsh Vihar, Delhi-110093 Defendants

¶12

Present: Shri Rajat Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶13

Date of Reserve: 24.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 13.11.2025

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 17.10.2018 filed before DRT-III, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Bikash Chandra Singh, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.20,37,899/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Nine only) as on 15.10.2018 along with

¶16

T.A No.2722 of 2022

¶17

pendentelite and future interest @11.90% per annum with monthly rests from 15.10.2018 till the date of realization and costs. Further, the name of Ms. Shraddha Tomar was substituted as authorized representative in place of Sh. Bikash Chandra Singh, erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor being defendant no.2, the applicant bank sanctioned financial assistance for a sum of Rs.13,00,000/- (Rupees Thirteen lacs only) on 11.01.2014 @10.65% floating rate of interest for purchase of Two Swift Dzire cars for commercial use to be repayable in 60 EMIs of Rs.28,039/-. Further, the applicant bank sanctioned Vehicle loan facility of Rs.8,30,000/- on 27.03.2014 @10.75% floating rate of interest for purchase of Maruti car Sx4ZDI Model repayable in 60 EMIs of Rs.17,943/- and another vehicle loan of Rs.8,69,000/- on 03.10.2015 @11.90% interest per annum for purchase of Two New WagonR LXI CNG cars repayable in 60 EMIs of Rs.19,287/- being purchased from M/s Fairdeals Cars Pvt.Ltd. All the vehicle loans were sanctioned under commercial CVEHT facility covered under CGTSME scheme against hypothecation of vehicle in favour of the applicant bank.

¶19

That in order to avail the vehicle loan facilities, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Loan Agreements, Sanction Letters, Agreements for Hypothecation of Vehicles, Agreements for Term Loan on 15.01.2014, 09.04.2014 and 06.10.2015 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶20

The defendants executed Acknowledgement of debt / Liability on 25.07.2016, 04.04.2017 and 19.07.2018 acknowledging the debts towards the applicant bank.

¶21

T.A No.2722 of 2022

¶22

That in order to secure the vehicle loan facilities sanctioned by the applicant bank, the defendants hypothecated the following vehicles in favour of applicant bank on 15.01.2014, 09.04.2014 and 06.10.2015 and deposited Registration Certificates (RCs) documents:

¶23

a. Two Swift Dzire VDI BS4M cars having Registration No.DL3CB-9402, Engine No.D13A2287793, Chasis No.MA3FJEB1S00453263 and DL-3CB-9322, Engine No.D13A2286364, Chasis No.MA3FJEB1S00452055;

¶24

b. Maruti Sx4 ZDI car having Registration No.DL-6CN-4512, Engine No.D13A2039647 Chasis No. MA3FFEB1S00216250.

¶25

lc. Two WagonR LXI CNG cars having Registration No. DL-1RT7245, Engine No.K10BN7635130, Chasis No. MA3EWDE1S00963535 and DL-1RT-7246, Engine No.K10BN7635318, Chasis No.MA3EWDE1S00963765.

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid vehicle loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms & conditions of sanction and despite of several requests, the defendants failed to regularize the accounts and repay the monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. The applicant bank classified the accounts as NPA on 31.12.2017 and issued legal demand notice dated 06.09.2018 calling upon the defendants to pay the entire outstanding dues to the applicant bank but neglected to do so. ,Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶27

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 06.02.2020, 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.

¶28

T.A No.2722 of 2022

¶29

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed various documents like Power of Attorney of Authorized Representative, Sanction Letters, Agreements for Hypothecation of Vehicles, Agreements for Term Loan, Acknowledgements of Debt, Copy of RC Documents of Vehicles, Legal Demand Notice, Certified Statement of Account and Certificate u/s 2A marked as Annexure Al to Annexure A16 from page no.1 to 79.

¶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 proved.

¶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.20,37,899/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Thirty-Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-Nine only) as on 15.10.2018 together with interest @11.90% per annum with monthly rests ( from the 15.10.2018 till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of the hypothecated Vehicles, as per details below:

¶35

i) Two Swift Dzire VDI BS4M cars having Registration No.DL3CB-9402, Engine No.D13A2287793, Chasis

¶36

T.A No.2722 of 2022

¶37

No.MA3FJEB1S00453263 and DL-3CB-9322, Engine No.D13A2286364, Chasis No.MA3FJEB1S00452055;

¶38

ii) Maruti Sx4 ZDI car having Registration No.DL-6CN-4512, Engine No.D13A2039647 Chasis No. MA3FFEB1S00216250. iii) Two WagonR LXI CNG cars having Registration No. DL-1RT7245, Engine No.K10BN7635130, Chasis No. MA3EWDE1S00963535 and DL-1RT-7246, Engine No.K10BN7635318, Chasis No.MA3EWDE1S00963765.

¶39

In case of shortfall / default, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶40

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

¶41

(Ill) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 12.01.2026.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

(Pronounced in open court) Dated: 13.11.2025

Union Bank of India v. M/S Yes Tour

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Yes Tour

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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Union Bank of India versus Gurdawar Singh

Canara Bank versus Smt Ravinder Kaur

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Eagle Electricals

Punjab National Bank versus Rachna Sharma

Karur Vysya Bank versus Parveen Malik and Ors.