Allowed

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Maa Durga Trading Company

DRT16 May 2026OA/167/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Punjab and Sind Bank for recovery of dues of Rs.20.41 lakh outstanding from M/s Maa Durga Trading Company. The tribunal proceeded ex-parte due to the respondent's absence and directed recovery from hypothecated assets or sale of properties.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the application and directed the respondent to pay Rs.20,41,538.14 with interest and costs within 30 days or face recovery from sale of assets.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Maa Durga Trading Company — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No. 167 of 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No.167 of 2023

¶5

•

¶6

Punjab & Sind Bank D-140, Vivekananda School Anand Vihar, Delhi-110092

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Maa Durga Trading Company

¶10

Proprietress Smt.Anita Devi Sarda w/o Om Prakash Sarda R/o 1/6249, Gali No.3,

¶11

East Rohtash Nagar

¶12

Shandara, North East Delhi-110032

¶13

Also at:

¶14

M/s Maa Durga Trading Company Proprietress

¶15

Smt.Anita Devi Sarda w/o Om Prakash Sarda X/1104, Arjun Gall, Raghubarpura No.2 Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-110031

¶16

Defendant

¶17

Present: Sh.Sumeet Batra, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶18

Date of Reserve: 04.05.2026

¶19

Date of Pronouncement: 16.05.2026

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 24.01.2023 through Sh.Kailash Chand, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of Rs.20,41,538.14 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty One Thousand Five Hundred Thirty Eight and paisa Fourteen only) as on 17.01.2023, out of which Rs.17,50,728.76

¶22

¶23

O.A. No. 167 of 2023

¶24

alongwith pendentelite and future interest @12.10% per annum with monthly rests in ODP limit account and Rs.2,90,809.38 @9.25% interest per annum with monthly rests in WCTL account plus @2% penal interest from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization with costs.

¶25

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant as proprietorship concern of Smt.Anita Devi Sarda vide loan application dated 07.01.2020 for business requirements, the applicant bank sanctioned ODP loan facility for Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs only) @10.50% interest per annum on 05.02.2020 and WCTL facility under GECL scheme for Rs.2,64,400/- (Rupees Two Lac Sixty Four Thousand Four Hundred only) to meet operational liabilities @7.00% interest per annum to be repaid in 48 EMIs of Rs.8,164/- on 17.06.2020 under Stand-up India scheme of Government of India against hypothecation of all current and fixed assets of defendant. The defendant also agreed to pay additional penal interest @2% in case of default in repayment of interest or installments.

¶26

In order to avail the loan facilities, the defendant through its proprietress submitted loan applications and executed Overdraft Agreement, Deed of Hypothecation hypothecating all current assets and fixed assets etc., Addendum to Loan Agreement, Term Loan Agreement and Undertaking with the applicant bank on 05.02.2020 and 17.06.2020.

¶27

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to deposit the installments and interest in the account in order to regularize the accounts with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant . bank classified the accounts as NPA on 23.12.2021 as per RBI s d

¶28

O.A. No. 167 of 2023

¶29

guidelines and issued notice dated 05.01.2023 to clear the outstanding but defendant neglected, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of its dues.

¶30

Notices under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 15.02.2022 was issued upon defendant to liquidate the outstanding liability but neglected.

¶31

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 30.01.2026, the defendant has 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 defendant.

¶32

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Kailash Chand, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as General Power of Attorney, Loan Application, Sanction Letter, Overdraft Agreement, Deeds of Hypothecation, Addendum to Loan Agreement, Sanction Letter for WCTL, Term Loan Agreement, Undertaking extending existing charge on Hypothecated Assets, Legal Notice and Statement of Accounts marked as Exb.AW 1/1 to Exb.AW 1/12 (Colly).

¶33

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.

¶34

0.A. No. 167 of 2023

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

ORDER

¶38

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.20,41,538.14 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty One Thousand Five Hundred Thirty Eight and paisa Fourteen only) as on 17.01.2023, out of which:

¶39

Rs.17,50,728.76 alongwith pendentelite and future interest @14.10% per annum with monthly rests in ODP limit account

¶40

Rs.2,90,809.38 @11.25% interest per annum with monthly rests in WCTL account

¶41

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 stocks and book debts etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendant.

¶42

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

¶43

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 15.07.2026.

¶44

O.A. No. 167 of 2023

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 16.05.2026

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Maa Durga Trading Company

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Maa Durga Trading Company

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 Sri Kamal Dey

State Bank of India versus Sri Ranadip Das And Anr.

Bank of India versus Sumana Nanda Ghosh and Anr.

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Pawanputra Oil Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus Ankush Rao

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Harish Shukla