Allowed

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Mkm Enterprises and Others

DRT8 May 2026OA/211/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of a loan account classified as NPA. The court directed the defendants to pay the principal amount along with costs and simple interest at 8% per annum, clarifying the interest rate requested by the appellant.

What did the court decide?

A recovery certificate was issued ordering the respondent defendants to jointly and severally pay Rs. 1,46,69,870.44 with simple interest @8% p.a. from the date of filing.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Mkm Enterprises and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.211/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.02.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 08.05.2026

¶6

Punjab and Sind Bank, a Banking Company constituted under the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act of 1980 with its Head Office at Bank House, 21, Rajendra Palace, New Delhi and amongst others a Branch at Model Town, Ludhiana, Punjab through its Principal Officer and Power of Attorney Holder, Sh. Vikas Singh, Chief Manager

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/S MKM Enterprises through its Partner, Sh. Lakhan Sharma, S/o Sh. Anand Sharma, having its Office at:

¶10

Address 1: House no. 138, Street no. 5, Green Valley, Near Mann Palace, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶11

Address 2: Kakowal Road, Tibba Road, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶12

M/S MKM Enterprises through its Authorized Partner, having its Office at:

¶13

Address 1: House no. 138, Street no. 5, Green Valley, Near Mann Palace, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶14

Address 2: Kakowal Road, Tibba Road, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶15

Sh. Lakhan Sharma, S/o Sh. Anand Sharma (Partner M/S MKM Enterprises), R/o House no. 138, Street no. 5, Green Valley, Near Mann Palace, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶16

Late Smt. Kiran Sharma, W/o Sh. Anand Sharma (Partner M/S MKM Enterprises), R/o House no. 138, Street no. 5, Green Valley, Near Mann Palace, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab through her LRs:

¶17

a. Sh. Anand Sharma, Husband

¶18

b. Sh. Vaibhav Sharma, Minor Son through his father, Sh. Anand Sharma

¶19

c. Ms. Mitali Sharma, Minor Daughter through her father, Sh. Anand Sharma

¶20

2 OA/211/2025

¶21

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS. M/S MKM ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶22

d. Sh. Lakhan Sharma, Son, already impleaded as defendant no. 3 All residents of House no. 138, Street no. 5, Green Valley, near Mann Palace, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶23

….……Defendants

¶24

Advocates:

¶25

Argued by Sh. Parunjeet Singh, Advocate for applicant

¶26

Sh. RS Bhatia, Advocate proxy for Sh. Lovish Kukkar, Advocate for defendant nos. 1 to 3

¶27

None for defendant nos. 4 (a) to 4 (d) (already ex-parte vide order dated 09.01.2026)

¶28

FINAL ORDER

¶29

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,46,69,870.44 (Rupees One Crore Forty Six Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy and Paise Forty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Vikas Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Authorization Letter dated 22.12.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶30

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant nos. 1 and 2 through its Partners defendant nos. 3 and 4 (since deceased) approached the applicant for grant of Overdraft Limit of Rs. 50 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 80 Lacs vide Loan Application, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶31

The applicant sanctioned Overdraft Limit of Rs. 50 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 80 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 18.05.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶32

Defendant no. 3 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 300 Sq. Yards situated at Shop nos. 1, 2 and 3, Village Haibowal Kalan, Hadbast no. 102, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed dated 18.05.2022 and Title Deed dated 24.03.2022, which are Annexure A8, A9 and A9/T to this OA.

¶33

3 OA/211/2025

¶34

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS. M/S MKM ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶35

Documents executed: Overdraft and Term Loan Agreement, Agreement of Guarantee, Deed of Hypothecation and Letter of Undertaking, all dated 18.05.2022, which are Annexure A4 (Colly) to A7 to this OA; Notices u/s 13 (2) and 13 (4), SARFAESI Act, 2002 dated 01.11.2023 and 06.02.2024, which is Annexure A10 (Colly) to this OA and Statement of Loan Accounts, which is Annexure A11 (Colly) to this OA.

¶36

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 1,46,69,870.44, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal and after service upon defendants, Sh. Tejinder Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Lovish Kukkar, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendants on 10.06.2025 and filed Memo of Appearance. Power of Attorney of Sh. Lovish Kukkar, Advocate was filed on behalf of defendant nos. 1 to 3 on 10.09.2025. Paper book was supplied to him. No WS was filed within stipulated period or even after expiry of stipulated period. Therefore, opportunity to file WS by defendant nos. 1 to 3 was closed and defence was struck off vide order dated 15.04.2026. No one appeared on behalf of defendant nos. 4 (a) to (d) despite service of summons and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 09.01.2026.

¶38

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Vikas Singh, Chief Manager, Punjab and Sind Bank, has been filed.

¶39

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶40

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. Sh. RS Bhatia, Advocate proxy for Sh. Lovish Kukkar, Advocate for defendant nos. 1 to 3 submitted that lenient view may be taken at the time of decree and prayed for awarding simple rate of interest.

¶41

4 OA/211/2025

¶42

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS. M/S MKM ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶43

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A11 (Colly) to this OA, it is proved that defendant nos. 1 and 2 through its Partner defendant nos. 3 and 4 (since deceased) approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 1,46,69,870.44 (Rupees One Crore Forty Six Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy and Paise Forty Four Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶44

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @8.40%p.a. with @2% penal interest from 12.11.2024 till the realization.

¶45

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the hypothecated assets/mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00% p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶46

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.1,46,69,870.44 (Rupees One Crore Forty Six Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy and Paise Forty Four Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest

¶47

¶48

OA/211/2025

¶49

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS. M/S MKM ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶50

@08.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated assets/mortgaged property of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶51

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶52

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 01.06.2026. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 08.05.2026

¶53

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶54

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Mkm Enterprises and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab and Sind Bank v. M/S Mkm Enterprises and Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Smt. Balwinder Kaur and Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Exso situated at Friends Mobile StORE and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Iqbal Singh and Another

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Ritik Parshant Fashion and Another

State Bank of India versus Smt. Amandeep Kaur

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Lovepreet Singh and Another