Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S v v Enterprises and Anr.

DRT20 Dec 2025TA/3135/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues of Rs.37.23 Lacs plus interest and costs from the defendant proprietors of M/s V.V. Enterprises, who were absent from the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Direct order to pay Rs.37,23,283.05 plus interest and costs within 30 days; direction to issue recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/S v v Enterprises and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 3135 of 2022

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Baltabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No.3135 of 2022

¶5

Union Bank of India

¶6

Sachdeva Public School Building FP Block, Maurya Enclave Pitampura, Delhi-110088 Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s V.V. Enterprises Proprietorship firm 698, Block GH-PKT-1,

¶9

Sector-291 Rohini, Delhi-110085

¶10

Sh.Vaibhav Vashistha

¶11

Proprietor of M/s V.V. Enterprises 698, Block GH-Pkt-1

¶12

Sector-29, Rohini, Delhi-110085 Defendants

¶13

Present: Shri Pankaj Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Reserve: 09.12.2025

¶15

Date of Pronouncement: 20.12.2025

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi on 21.09.2021 through Mr. Vijay Kalra, 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 Rs.37,23,283.05 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Twenty Three

¶18

¶19

T.A. No. 3135 of 2022

¶20

Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Three and paisa Five only) as on 30.06.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @11% per annum from 01.07.2021 till the date of realization along with costs.

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 through defendant no.2 as proprietor, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit for Rs.25,00,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Lacs only) on 14.03.2019 under CC Union Trade Scheme against hypothecation of goods and debts. In addition, the applicant bank sanctioned Rs.2,50,000/- on 12.05.2020 and Rs.4,90,000/- on 05.06.2020 under COVID Emergency line of Credit covered under CGTMSE scheme.

¶22

That in order to avail the credit facilities, the defendants submitted loan application and executed DP Notes, Letters of Undertaking for Borrower and for Guarantors, Letters of Continuity, Simple Loan Agreement, Interest Agreement, Letter of Guarantee, Term Loan Agreement, Hypothecation Agreement of Goods & Debts and Composite Hypothecation deed with the applicant bank on 14.03.2019, 12.05.2020 and 05.06.2020.

¶23

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 regularize the account. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.03.2021 as per RBI guidelines due to non-adherence to financial discipline by the Defendants but they neglected to clear the dues, hence the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues.

¶24

¶25

T.A. No. 3135 of 2022

¶26

Notices under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 was issued on 02.07.2021 to the defendants by the applicant bank but they failed to clear the 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 05.12.2023, 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.

¶28

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has submitted documents such as Demand Promissory note, Letter of Undertaking for Borrower, Letter of Undertaking for Guarantors, Letter of Continuity, Simple Loan Agreement, Letter of Undertaking not to alienate Hypothecated Goods, Interest agreement, Letter of Guarantee, Hypothecation agreement of goods & debts, General Term agreement, Composite Hypothecation deed, Recall Notice, Certificate of NPA, Statement of account, Certificate under Banker's Books Evidence Act marked as page no.40 to 155.

¶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 approved.

¶30

1 9. 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

¶32

T.A. No. 3135 of 2022

¶33

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

¶34

ORDER

¶35

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.37,23,283.05 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Twenty Three Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Three only) as on 30.06.2021 together with pendentelite and future interest @11% per annum with monthly rests from 01.07.2021 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stocks, etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendant.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 20.12.2025

Union Bank of India v. M/S v v Enterprises and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S v v Enterprises and Anr.

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

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