Allowed

Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Ltd. v. M/S Kundan Mal Roop Chand Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.

DRT18 Sept 2025TA/783/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought recovery of dues and interest against five borrowers. After examining the application and evidence, the Tribunal allowed the claim and directed recovery of the principal sum along with adjusted interest.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay Rs.5,44,51,254.61 plus pendente lite and future interest at 12% per annum.

Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Ltd. versus M/S… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 783 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. 783 of 2022

¶5

Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Limited (e-Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Private Ltd.) 301, 3rd floor, Kanchanjunga Building Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s Kundan Mal Roop Chand Jewellers Pvt. Ltd (Borrower)

¶8

121, 2058/38, 1st Floor Gurudwara Road, Karol bagh Naiwala, New Delhi-110015

¶9

Sh. Karan Singh Soni House no.52/38, Block-52 Ramjas Road, Karol Bagh New Delhi-110005

¶10

Sh. Roop Chand Soni House no. 52/38, Block-52 Ramjas Road, Karol Bagh New Delhi-110005

¶11

Smt. Anjna Soni House no.52/38, Block-52 Ramjas Road, Karol Bagh New Delhi-110005

¶12

Smt. Birla Devi House no.52/38, Block-52 Ramjas Road, Karol BaghO New Delhi-110005

¶13

Sh. Atul Kumar Kansal (Proforma defendant) Resolution Professional

¶14

In the matter of Universal Build Well Pvt. Ltd. under CIRP 8th floor, Universal Trade Tower Sohna Road, Sec-49 Gurugram-122101 Defendants

¶15

¶16

T.A. No. 783 of 2022

¶17

Present: Ms. Taru Saxena, Counsel for the applicant Fl

¶18

Date of Institution: 26.04.2022

¶19

Date of Pronouncement: 18.09.2025

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This original application has been filed by the applicant on 26.04.2022 filed before DRT-III Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I, Delhi through Sh. Tej Singh, authorized representative of the applicant FI under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Read with Rule 8 of Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedural) Rules 1993 against the defendant no.1 to 5 for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,44,51,254.61 (Rupees Five Crores Forty Four Lacs Fifty One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Four and Paisa Sixty One only) along with pendentelite and future interest @13% per annum from the date of filing of this application till the date of actual realization with costs.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that the Assignor company vide Assignment Agreement dated 29.12.2017 assigned the debt of defendants with all rights, title etc. and interest in security interest created and to continue legal proceedings against the defendants herein. On the request of defendant no.1 to 5, the Assignor company (L&T Housing Finance Ltd.) sanctioned loan facilities of Rs.2,06,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Six Lacs only) and Rs.89,75,000/- (Rupees Eighty Nine Lacs Seventy Five Thousand only) on 30.05.2016 and 31.05.2016 @13% interest per annum which was to be repayable in Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.3,07,581/and Rs.1,34,007/- for purchase of Commercial property. Since

¶23

¶24

T.A. No. 783 of 2022

¶25

the mortgaged property was purchased from defendant no.6, is under CIRP presently through Resolution Professional has been made Proforma party and no relief is claimed against him.

¶26

That in order to avail the loan facilities, the defendant no.1 to 5 submitted Loan Application with L&T Housing Finance Ltd. and executed loan Agreements, Power of Attorneys, Declarations, Demand Promissory Notes, MODT alongwith creation of Charge with MCA in favour of Assignor / applicant FI on 31.05.2016.

¶27

That in order to secure the credit facilities, the defendant no.1 to 5 created equitable mortgage of property being 'all piece and parcel of the Property being Commercial Shop no.22, admeasuring 3500 sq. ft., Ground Floor, Universal Trade Tower, Sohna Road, Sector-49, Gurgaon, Haryana' with the applicant FI on 31.05.2016. The applicant FI got registered its charges over the mortgage property on 26.11.2019.

¶28

It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant no.1 to 5 failed to comply with the terms and conditions with applicant FI and deposit monthly installments in the accounts. The applicant FI classified the account as NPA on 07.11.2017 by the Assignor as per RBI guidelines.

¶29

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 02.12.2017 was issued to the defendants by the applicant FI but they failed to clear the dues. The applicant FI issued notice u/s 13(4) of SARFEASI Act on 02.02.2019 and taken symbolic possession of the property duly published in newspapers on 07.02.2019 and approached Ld. col

¶30

¶31

T.A. No. 783 of 2022

¶32

District Magistrate, Gurgaon to take physical possession of the mortgaged property and subsequently an order dated 17.12.2019 was passed but the applicant could not succeed to get the said order executed as the mortgaged property is not demarcated/ identifiable.

¶33

The applicant issued intimation letter dated 24.09.2018 regarding assignment of debt in its favor.

¶34

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 24.07.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶35

In order to prove its case, the applicant Fl has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Tej Singh, authorized representative of the applicant Fl has proved the documents as Certificate of Incorporation, Original Application, Assignment Agreement, Sanction Letters, Loan Agreements, Power of Attorney, Declarations, Demand Promissory Notes, MODT alongwith Creation of Charge with MCA, Original Title Deeds, Notice u/s 13(2), Possession Notice and Newspaper Publications, Order dated 17.12.2019 passed by Ld.DM Gurugram, Certified Statement of Accounts alongwith Certificate under IT Act 2000 marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW1/12 (Colly).

¶36

The applicant FI has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant FI is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶37

¶38

T.A. No. 783 of 2022

¶39

The case filed by the applicant FI gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant FI has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶40

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶41

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

¶42

FINAL ORDER

¶43

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant No. 1 to 5 to pay to the applicant FI, jointly or severally within 30 days, a sum of Rs.5,44,51,254.61/- (Rupees Five Crores Forty four Lacs Fifty One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Four and Paisa Sixty One only) along with pendentelite and future interest @12% per annum from the date of filing this application till the date of realization with costs failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of mortgaged property i.e. 'all piece and parcel of Property being Commercial Shop no.22,

¶44

¶45

T.A. No. 783 of 2022

¶46

admeasuring 3500 sq. ft. situated at Ground floor in Universal Trade Tower, Sohna Road, Sector-49, Gurgaon, Haryana'. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from sale of the moveable and immovable properties of defendant no.1 to 5.

¶47

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

¶48

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 17.11.2025.

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 18.09.2025

Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Ltd. v. M/S Kundan Mal Roop Chand Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Ltd. v. M/S Kundan Mal Roop Chand Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Ashraf C a versus Indian Overseas Bank

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Akrosh Abdul Khan

Ms Siddhi Vinayak Steel and others versus Punjab National Bank

Central Bank of India versus M/S Khushboo Vastraalay

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Sunil Kumar

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Poonam Devi