Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Raj Buildcon Construction Ltd. & Ors.

DRT18 Jun 2025TA/910/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-II Delhi allowed an original application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, by Union Bank of India against multiple respondents. The court rejected defenses regarding authorization, interest computation, and forgery, directing the respondents to pay the dues and recover from mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 20,04,33,106.89 along with cost and interest at 15.75% from date of filing, recoverable from sale of hypothecated assets, mortgaged properties, or personal assets.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Raj Buildcon Construction Ltd… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Before SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI, Presiding^Officer Debts Recovela Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

TA No.910 OF 2023

¶3

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RA'^BUILDCON CONSTRUCTION tTD &ORS

¶4

Reserved on : 08.05.2025 Pronounced on : 18.06.2025

Union Bank of India

-^{Applicant bank}

Vs.

1 M/s Raj Buildcon Construction^Limited 2 Rajinder Bansal 3 Deepak Bansal 4 Krishan Bansal 5 Kaushalya Bansal 6 Manoj Kumar More 7 M/s Bharat Fabtex & Corporate^{h/t Ltd.} - Defendants

¶9

Present:

¶10

Shri Rajeev Sagar, Counsel^{appears for} applicant bank. Shri Ravi Data, Counselfor^defendants.

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

This original application has^{been filed by the} applicant banks, on 14.05.2013^{through ShriO.P.} Sharma, Authorized Officer^{of the applicant bank, under} Section 19 ofthe RDB^{Act, 1993 against the defendants} for recovery of a sum of Rs.20,04,33,106'89^together with cost, charges and^{pendentellite and future interest} @15.75olo^{from date of filing of this O.A. till the} realization in full.

¶13

The brief facts of the^{case are that the defendant} no. 1 along with the defendant^{nos.2to 7, approached} the applicant bank and for sanction^{of Cash Credit,} WCTL, FITL, Term Loan-l, Bank Guarantees,^Term

€J

TA NO/910/2023

loan-2, Term Loan-3, Union Mile^{Loan, against} the mortgage of their^{propefties.Earlier the defendant} company was known as R.B. Builders^{when the} defendant first approached the^{applicant bank in 1994} but the name of the said company^{was subsequently} changed to M/s. Raj Buildcon^{ConstructionLimited' The} defendant no.1^proposed the^{applicant bank to repay} the said Cash Credit,^{WCTL, FITL, Term Loans, Bank} Guarantees & Union Mib^{Loan by way of regular} payments. It is submitted that the said loans^were required by them for the^{purpose of business} requirement. The loans/ limits^{were increasedon} request of defendant no.1^{and in terms of sanction} letters issues from time^{to time' The last such sanction} letters dated 21.09.2012,^{sanctioning an amount of} Rs.2282.72|acs, duly^{acknowledgedby the defendant} no.1 company is annexed^{with the OA' Duringthis} period, the applicant had approached^{the applicant} bank for issuance of^{severaldifferent bank guarantees,} several of which^{has been revoked.Several of the bank} guarantees has been adjusted, however^{the dues of two} such bank^{guaranteesare yet to be paid by the} defendants. Another two^{bank guarantees have not} been revoked till^{date. Basedon the credentialsof both} the defendants and after^{completing the verificationof} the defendants on the basis of^{the documentsso} submifted by them the^{applicant bank sanctioned and} disbursed different credit^{limitsin the form of Cash} Credit limit, Bank Guarantees,^{Working Capital term} loan (WCTL), Funded^{Interest TermLoan (FITL), Term} Loan-1, Term Loan-2, Term^{Loan-3, Bank Guarantees} Union Mile Loan^{which were renewedfrom time to time.} On 28.09.2012, all its loan^{documentswere} consolidated and common,loar;documents^{for a sum of} 9).

¶18

¶19

TA NO/910/2023

¶20

Ps.2282.72 lacs were executed.^Pursuant thereto, various documents^{includingComposite} Hypothecation Deed, General Term^{Loan Agreements,} Letter of Guarantees, Demand^{Promissory Note, Letter} of extension of mortgages^{etc. were duly signed &} executed by the defendant^{no.1. The said loan} documents were to be^{governedby the certain terms} and conditions as contained.^{The Composite} Hypothecation Deed dated^{28.09.2012 for a sum of} Rs.2282.72|acs,^{Hypothecation Agreementof Goods &} Debts dated 28.09.20L2^for a^{sum of Rs.3crores,} General Term Loan^{Agreementdated 28.09.2012 for a} sum of Rs.981.19^{lacs, GeneralTerm Loan Agreement} dated 28.09.2012 for a^{sum of Rs.29'58lacs,} Agreement on Rate of^{Interest dated 28.09.2012for a} sum of Rs.2282.72,^{Letter of Undertaking not to} Alienate Hypothecated^{Goods dated28.09.2012for a} sum of Rs.300 lacs,^{Demand Promissory Note dated} 28.O1.2OLZ for a sum of^{Rs'98,11,9000/-,Demand} Promissory Note dated^{28.09.20L2for a sum of} Rs.31,5,60,000/-, Demand^{Promissory Note dated} 28.09.20t2 for a sum of^{Rs.3,00,00,000/-,Demand} Promissory Note dated^{28.09.20L2for a sum of} Rs.1,36,60,000/- &^{Demand PromissoryNote dated} 28.Og.21Lzfor a sum of^{Rs.29,58,000/-. The defendant} nos.2 to 7 had executed^{letter of guarantees dated} 28.09.2012 in favour of^{the applicant bank to secure} account maintained^{by the defendant no.1 to the tune} of Rs.2282.72 lacs.^{The defendant no.1 had approached} the applicant bank for^{issuance of bank guaranteein} favour of the beneficiary M/s.^TodayHomes Infrastructure Private Limited,^{which was subsequently} renewed upto 04.04.20t3^{and was subsequently} revoked by the said beneficiqry.^{The copy of application} S}

¶21

¶22

TANOl9t0l2023

¶23

dated 28.09.2011executed by the defendant^bank requesting for issuance of bank^{guarantee in favour of} the said beneficiary, M/s Today^{Homes Infrastructure} Private Limited, the bank^guarantee dated^08.10.2011 issued in favour of said beneficiary^{M/s. TodayHomes} Infrastructure Private Limited, the^{request letter dated} 03.10.2012 for extension of^{bank guarantee, the letter} of extension of bank^{guarantee dated 04.10'2012} executed by applicant ban(^{the letter dated 05'04.2013} issued by the beneficiary^{for revocation of bank} guarantee & copy of demand draft dated^08.04.2013 for a sum of Rs.1,24,00,000.00^{paid to the beneficiary} on revocation. The said^{bank guarantee loan was} consolidated into the^{loan documentsexecuted on} 28.09.2012. The defendant^{no'1 had also approached} the applicant bank for^{issuance of another bank} guarantee dated 10.02.2012in favour^{of the beneficiary} M/s. JK Cements Works^{(Division of J K Cements} Limited), which was^{subsequendyrenewed but was} subsequently revoked^{by the said beneficiary. The letter} dated 21.01.2013^{issued by the beneficiary for} revocation of bank^{guarantee& evidencingissuanceof} pay order no.16634302, dated 24.01.2013^{for a sum of} Rs.20,00,000.00^paid to^{the beneficiary on revocation} and. The said bank^{guarantee loan document was also} consolidated into the^{loan documents executedon} 28.09.20t2. The Union^{MilesVehicleLoan for a sum of} Rs.18.20 lacs were^{grantedfor purchase of vehicle,} hypothecated to the applicant^{bank, vide sanctionletter} dated 04.03.2010 i.e.,^{(a) Vehicle Name: Volkswagen} Beetle 2.0. (b) Vehicle^{Registration No. HR26BB2080.} The said loan was also subsequently^{consolidated into} the loan documents executed on^{28.09.2012.The} defendants, being the moftgagor^{to the said loans/} g)'

¶24

¶25

TA NO/910/2023

¶26

limits had mortgaged their^properties in^favourof applicant bank and as mentioned^{below. As per the} documents^pertaining to^{mortgageexecuted in respect} of the said loans/ limits,^{the defendants mortgaged} their^properties. i.e.,^{(i)HouseNo.Ll44, GroundFloor,} Sector-l, Housing Board^{Colony, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan} Housing Board Colony,^{Rajasthan Measuring 148.50 sq.} mtrs., in the name of Sh.^{Rajendra Bansal.(ii)} Residential Propefi at^{Khata No.834, OPP. UTI Sector-} 8, Water Tank,^{NearGas Godown,Village Millakpur,} Gujjar, Bhiwadi,^{Rajasthan, measuring700 SQ. YDS.} owned by Mrs. Kaushalya^{Bansal(iii) 2 Bigha 8 Biswa} Vacant Commercial^{Plot AdmeasuringT260 SQ. YDS. at} Pushp Vatika, Mehla Jobnar^{Road,Village Asalpur,} Tehsil Fulera, Distt.^{Jaipur,owned by M/s. Raj Buildcon} Construction Ltd.^{(iv) Office No.4-A,4h Floor,Welldone} Tech Park, Sector-48,^{Sohna Road,Gurgaon owned by} M/s. Raj Buildcon Constructions^{Ltd' (v) office No.4-B,} both on 4h Floor,^{WelldoneTech Park, Sector-48, Sohna} Road, Gurgaon owned^{By M/s Raj Buildcon} Constructions Ltd.(vi)^{Property No'102.18Bigha(Area} 16404.74 SQ. MTRS.)^{IndustrialLand at Village Khewli,} Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali^{Rajasthanowned by an} Associate Company M/s^{Bharat Fab Tech & Corporate} Park hrt. Ltd. (vii) LOt.77^{Bigha IndustrialLand at} Village Khewli, Tehsil^{Raipur, District Pali Rajasthan} owned by an Associate^{Company M/s BharatFab Tech} & Corporate Park hrt.^{Ltd. and 80 Bighas OwnedBy M/s} Raj Buildcon Construction^Ltd.

¶27

It is further submitted^{that the defendants} enjoyed and utilized the Loan^{facility, but failed to} maintain the flnancial discipline^{and failed to repay the} due amounts. The applicant- bank^requestedthe ()'

¶28

TA NO/9r0/2023 6

¶29

defendants to regularize the loan account^{by visits} and letters, but there was no^{response from the} defendants, hence the account^{was classified as NPA on} 31.12.2012. Therefore, the applicant^{bank serued a} recall cum demand notice dated^{07.05'2013to the} defendants but failed to^{recover the same Thus, the} present O.AffA is preferred by the applicant^{bank to} recover its dues.

¶30

On notice by this^{Tribunal, the defendantno.1,2} & 7^put appearance through^{counsel and defendant} nos.l & 2 filed written statement^{and evidence. The} defendant nos.3 to 6^{failed to put appearance'} Accordingly, defendant nos.^{3 to 6 were proceeded} expafte vide order dated^{02.12.2014.Thereafter, the} defendant nos. 3 to 5^{put appearance through counsel} but failed to flle WS. The opportunity^{of filling wriften} statement by defendant^{nos. 3 to 7 was closed vide} order dated 03.06.2015^{but the defendantnos. 1 to 5} and defendant no. 7^{have filed their respective} evidence.

¶31

In their written^{statementthe defendant nos. 1 &} 2 have denied the facts mentioned^{in the OA. It is} submitted that the officer of^{the bank is no more} authorised on the date of^{flling of this O.A becausethe} Directors of the bank were no^{more on the serviceof} the bank as well as on the^post of^{Directorsand they} have left the bank services long back^{and do not remain} of the same^position when this^{OA was filed on} 13.06.2013 so this OA has not been^{filedby competent} person of the bank and deserves to be dismissed on the very ground. It is submitted that computation of the accounts on all incorrect rate of interest, as^{well as levy} of higher interest so the .gqid_ statement is^purely s-\

¶32

¶33

TA NO/910/2023

¶34

incorrect and the bank be directed to^{reproducedthe} correct statement of account with^{clear applicationof} interest hence the said OA deserves to^{be dismissed on} the said count alone. The^{OA being basedon} documents which certain documents are^partially forged and as certain exhibits bear^{forged signature of} the defendant no.2, due to^{which the said documents} cannot be relied uponⁱⁿ this^{present case. It is further} submitted that the that defendant^{M/s Raj Buildcon} Constructions Ltd. was allotted^{construction of Civil,} plumbing and electrical work of four towers^(including corresponding non-tower^{area) at canary greens,} sector-73, Gurgaon on 02.09.2011^{and the said contract} worth Rs.1,24,00,000/-^{was guaranteed by UnionBank} of India and bank^{guarantee document was executed} dated 08.10.2011 between^{the parties' Accordingly,the} work was executed by Raj^{Buildcon Constructions Ltd.} Secondly bank^{guaranteewas also executed for} contract work of M/s. Hirise^{Hospitality h/t' Ltd. Kolkata} and Raj Buildcon Constructions^{Ltd' for civil} construction work for^{Hotel Project located at Adj. ISRO} housing society, Bhopal-Ambli^{Road, Ahmadabad,} Gujarat worth Rs.24,73,28,1921-^{and accordinglythe} defendant started the execution of the^{contracton the} sites allotted to the defendant and^{huge amount of raw} material, heavy machinery and other^{fixtures and} equipment worth Rs.23,5L,2201- was^{installed at the} site. The bank officers were aware of the^contracted sites of the defendant and suddenly without any^prior notice/information visited the sites and issued notice to the contracted^people of the defendant and informed them regarding the defendant's default to the bank and irregularity in the account, also apprehended the working labour on the site rqgarding the^poor financial <"\

¶35

TA NO/910/2023

¶36

¶37

position of the defendant company and has ultimately disturbed the working^project of^the defendant causing huge losses to the^defendant company. It is submitted that bank^{has alleged to lone} mortgaged seven valuable^{properties of the company to} secure the loan facility^{granted to the defendant} company and it is submitted that^{on 25'03.2013&} 26.03.2013^possession of two^{propefties(1) 3 Bigha 8} Biswa vacant commercial^{plot measuring7260Sq' Yds.} at Pushp Vatika, Mahla-lobner^{Road, Village Asalpur,} Tehsil Phulera, Distt. Jaipur^{(2) Property 102.18Bigha-} industrial land at Village Khewil,^{Tehsil Raipur, Distt.Pali} (Raj.) owned by associate company^{M/s. Bharat Febtek} & corporate^park limited^{was published and the} possession of the said properties taken by^{the applicant} bank. The^properties worth^{Rs.4.80 Crores& Rs.3.87} Crores Total amount to Rs.8.67^{Crores are in the} absolute^possession of the^{applicant bank since March} 2013 but till date no sale^{proceedingsof the said} property was initiated by the applicant bank.^{When the} bank has already taken the^{possessionof the secured} assets on March 2013 but till^{date the said amount was} not adjusted in the loan account^{and therebycharging} heavy interest /^penal interest^{and misc' charges in the} said loan account whereby^{causing heavy losses to the} defendant company. That^even the^{notice/application} filed by the applicant bank stating outstanding^{dues of} Rs.18 Cr. approx but they have till date^{not adjusted} amount of Rs.10.00 Cr. towards^{the value of properties} taken in^possession and the balance outstanding^which comes to only Rs.08.67 Cr. and it is also^wofth mentioning here that on 23.05.2014 bank^{has also} taken the^possession of^property situated at^Bhiwadi House No. U44,G.F. Sector-l, Housing Board,^Bhiwadi

TA NO/910/2023

(Raj.) the said property was valued Rs.98.83 Lacs was also taken under the^possession by the applicant bank and after adjusting the value of the^{said property} the amount comes to Rs.10.68 Cr.^{Approx. The} applicant bank has till date taken^{no steps for the} recovery of outstanding dues against^{the debtors of the} defendant company and after^{adjustingthe recoverable} debt amount in the outstanding^{duesof the bank and} only amount of Rs.4.33 Cr.^{remainsbalance} outstanding in the said loan account. It^{is further} submitted that a settlement agreement^{has been} entered into between the defendant^{company &} applicant bank wherein vide^{proposal dated} 25.0L.2014, 30.01.2014, 04.02.20t4, 05.02.2014^& 28.03.2014 were^given to the applicant^{bank wherein it} was clearly stated that^{permission/NOC by the bankbe} issued in favour of the company^{regardingmortgaged} properties situated at Pali (Rai.) (Pushap Vatika, Jaipur) being the commercial land whereby^{the permission} sorted from the applicant bank and defendants^offered to undertake to make the^{payment from the sale} proceeds of the land and bank will hand over all the original title deeds to the defendants^{on the depositing} of the said amount and also^{Rs.3 Croresbe deposited} by the sale of^property situated^{at Jaipurfor which the} pafi are doing hard work for the settlement or sale of the said^properties to repay the bank dues and^also huge amount is likely to be received from M/s.^Hirise Hospitality P. Ltd. and M/s. Today Homes & Infrastructure Limited. A schedule of a receivable amount was also^given to bank worth Rs.6.35 Crore and request for opening an Escrow account was made and after considering all the facts and request of the defendants on 08.05.2014 fo_llowing decisions were e)

¶42

TA NO/910/2023 l0

¶43

taken in the^presence of Chief Manager^{(Law) and} Dy. General Manager of Union Bank of^India.The defendants themselves are^{intendingto settle the bank} account by way of^private sale of^{mortgageproperties} with the bank for which the defendant^{has got the} buyers from whom who^{will catch better prices and also} the outstanding dues will be^{repaid by the sale of the} said^properties and not extra^{burdon will be levied on} the defendants. The applicant^{bank has takenthe} possession of three valuable^properties worth^Rs. Approx 11 Crore wherein the^{possession of two} properties was taken l1/zyearc above & of one^property with more three months & the^{said propefties have not} been sold by the applicant bank.^{Even the permission} for selling those^properties by the^{defendantcompany} was not given resulting into^loss of^{Rs.11 Cr' The} defendant company is entitled to^{get the value of} properties adjusted and reversal of interest charged on the recoverable amount to^{reduce the burden of} outstanding dues from^{May2013 till the sale of the said} properties. It is prayed that this Honble Tribunal^may dismissed the OA and action taken^{by the bankunder} provisions of Section 13 SARFAESI Act.

¶44

During the course of^{proceedings, on 25.05.2017} the Ld. Counsel for defendants submitted^that defendant no.2 has expired.^{But the applicant bank has} failed to bring on record the^LRs of defendant^no'2 despite of availing various opportunities,^{therefore,the} proceedings against defendant no.2 and his LRs were abated by this Tribunal vide order dated^12.10.2018.

¶45

Both the parties have filed their respective l.evidence. e)..

¶46

TA NOi9l0/2023

¶47

¶48

B. Heard the Ld. Counsel of both^the parties and perused the record.

¶49

The first contention of the Ld.^{counsel of the} defendant is that the OA^is not^{filed by the competent} person duly authorized by the bank and therefore, the OA is liable to be dismissed.^{From perusal of the record} it is clear that the OA has been^{flled by competent} person having full authority to file and sign the OA and therefore, the contention of the defendants^{has no} force.

¶50

The next contention of defendants^{is that the} applicant bank has filed^{incorrectstatement of account} and the interest has been^{charged at a high rate and} therefore, the OA is liable to^{be dismissed. From perusal} of the record it is clear that^{the statement has been filed} and there is no discrepancy^{in the statement of account.} The applicant bank has charged the^{rate of interestas} per agreement entered into between the^parties.

¶51

The next contention of the defendants^{is that} there are no signatures of^{defendant no.2 on the said} documents and the signatures are^forgedand fabricated. In this regard I have^{perused the record.} From^perusal of the record it^is clear^{that the defendants} are well educated^person and are^businessman' Therefore, it cannot be said that the signatures^of defendant no.2 are forged and^{fabricated. Thereis no} evidence filed on behalf of the defendants that the signatures of defendant no.2 are forged and^fabricated.

¶52

The next contention of defendant is that the applicant bank has not filed the documents^prior to 2012 and therefore, they have suppressed the material fact and the OA is liable to be dismissed. From^perusal

TA NO/910/2023

of the record it is clear that the applicant bank^has filed all the documents which are^{necessary for the} disposal of the^present OA.^{Therefore,the contention} of the defendants has no force.

¶57

The next contention of the^{defendantis that the} statement of account and other^{documents has not} been^proved as^per Bankers^{Book Evidence Act. From} perusal of the record it is clear that all the document has been^proved as^per Bankers^{Book Evidence Act and} as^per Indian Evidence^{Act. There is no discrepancyin} the same.

¶58

The next contention of defendants^{is that the} information of the declaration of the^{accountas NPA} has not been^given to the^{defendants and an amount} of Rs.4,35,736l- has been^{credited after declaration of} account as NPA and therefore,^{the accounthas wrongly} been declared as NPA. But the^{contention of the} defendant has no force.^{There is no need to issue any} notice before declaration of^{the account as NPA. Merely} because credit entry has been^{made in the account the} account has not become^standard.

¶59

The next contention of the^{defendantis that the} documents annexed with the OA^{as Annexure 3 to 18} has not been^properly stamped and^{cannot be read into} evidence. But the contention of the defendant^{has no} force. There is no necessity of any stamp on the^paper alleged by the defendant.

¶60

The next contention of the defendant^is that the instrument of hypothecation does not bear the signature of the officials of the bank and therefore, the documents cannot be read into evidence. But the contention of the defendant has no force. All the S.\

¶61

¶62

TA NO/910/2023

¶63

documents have been^properly executed^{by the} defendants and the same can be^{relied upon.} Therefore, the contention of the defendans^{has no} force.

¶64

t7. From^perusal of the^{entire evidence, it is clear that} the defendants have failed to^{prove their c:lse as} claimed in the written statement.^{On the other hand,the} applicant bank has^{proved his case against the} defendants and therefore, the^{defendants are liable to} pay jointly and severally the amount claimed^{by the} applicant bank and ,6" 94fl-A^{of the applicant bank is} liable to be allowed.

¶65

In the light of the above discussions,^{the presentTA} deserves to be allowed.

¶66

ORDER

¶67

I hereby allow this^{T.A. of the Applicant Bank and} direct the defendant nos.^{1 and 3 to 7 to pay jointly} and severally to the applicant^{bank within 30 days from} today, a sum of Rs.20,04,33,106.89^{along with cost,} expenses and interest @15.75olo^{from the date of filing} of this O.A which has become^{TA till the date of} realization. fhe OAfl-A has already been^{abated against} defendant no.2, therefore, the^LRs of defendant^no.2 are not liable to^pay any amount.

¶68

In case of failure to deposit the above^amount within the stipulated^period, the same shall^be recovered from the sale of the hypothecated assets and sale of the mortgaged^properties i.e.,^(i)House No.U44, Ground Floor, Sector-1, Housjn_g Board Colony,^Bhiwadi, 4)

¶69

¶70

TA NO/910/2023

¶71

Rajasthan Rajasthan Housing Board Colony, Measuring 148.50 sq. mtrs., in the^name of^Sh. Rajendra Bansal. (ii) Residential^{Property at Khata} No.834, OPP. UTI Sector-8, Water^{Tank,Near Gas} Godown, Village Millakpur, Gujjar,^{Bhiwadi, Rajasthan,} measuring 700 SQ. YDS. owned by^{Mrs. Kaushalya} Bansal (iii) 2 Bigha 8^{Biswa Vacant CommercialPlot} Admeasuring 7260 SQ.^{YDS. at PushpVatika, Mehla} Jobnar Road, Village^{Asalpur, Tehsil Fulera, Distt.} Jaipur, owned by M/s. Raj^{Buildcon ConstructionLtd.} (iv) Office No.4-Ar 4b Floor, Welldone^{Tech Park,} Sector-48, Sohna^{Road, Gurgaon owned by M/s. Raj} Buildcon Constructions^{Ltd. (v) office No'4-B,both on} 4s Floor, Welldone Tech^{Park, Sector-48, SohnaRoad,} Gurgaon owned By^{M/s Raj Buildcon Constructions} Ltd.(vi) Propefi^{No.102.18 Bigha (Area 16404.74SQ.} MTRS.) Industrial Land^{at Village Khewli, Tehsil Raipur,} Distt. Pali Rajasthan owned^{by an Associate Company} M/s Bharat Fab Tech &^{Corporate Park tut. Ltd. (vii)} l}l.77 Bigha Industrial^{Land at Village Khewli, Tehsil} Raipur, District Pali^{Rajasthanowned by an Associate} Company M/s^{BharatFab Tech & Corporate Park tut.} Ltd. and 80 Bighas Owned^{By M/s Raj Buildcon} Construction Ltd. In^{caseof short fall, the same shall be} recovered from the sale of^{personal movable and} immovable assets of the defendant^{nos. 1 and 3 to 7.}

¶72

Recovery Certificate be^{issuedforthwith and be} sent to Recovery Officer,^{Debts RecoveryTribunal-Il,} Delhi.

¶73

The registry of this Tribunal^{is herebydirected to} issue free copy of the order and^{send the same to both} the parties. q).\

¶74

TA NO/910/2023 ls

¶75

Parties are direct to appear^{before the Ld.} Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on^{18.08.2025.Pending} IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶76

File be consigned to records.

¶77

Date: 18.06.2025

¶78

sa ' t--t^_l (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶79

This^judgement has been signed, dated^and pronounced in open court.

¶80

S.<br>

¶81

Date:18.06.2025

¶82

(susHrl KUMA( RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶83

Union Bank of India v. M/S Raj Buildcon Construction Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Raj Buildcon Construction Ltd. & Ors.

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