Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Shiv Om Knitwear and Another

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/291/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Bank of Baroda for recovery of Rs.22.50 lakhs from a borrower who defaulted on a cash credit limit. The respondents appeared ex-parte. The court granted recovery and allowed simple interest at 08% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.22,49,817.72 with 08% simple interest; Issuance of Recovery Certificate; Sale of hypothecated assets.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Shiv Om Knitwear and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.291/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 27.03.2026

¶6

Bank of Baroda, a Public Sector Banking and Financial Services Company having its Head Office at Suraj Plaza 1, Sayajigunj, Baroda390005 and a Branch Office among others at Pratap Chowk, Industrial Area- B, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141003 through its Authorized Officer and duly constituted Power of Attorney Holder, Sh. Jagroop Singh, Chief Manager at Partap Nagar Branch, Ludhiana

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

M/s Shiv Om Knitwear, through its proprietor Sh. Ram Diya, S/o Gugan, 1385, Raju Colony, Tibba Road, Street no. 5, Ludhiana- 141007.

¶9

Sh. Ram Diya, S/o Gugan, R/o 1385, Raju Colony, Tibba Road, Street no. 5, Ludhiana- 141007.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Ms. Seerat Sharma, Advocate proxy for Sh. SK Dhir, Advocate for Applicant

¶13

Defendant already ex-parte vide order 10.03.2026

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.22,49,817.72 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventeen and Paise Seventy Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jagroop Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 20.09.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.20.00 lacs vide Application Form dated 12.05.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶17

2 OA NO. 291/2025

¶18

BANK OF BARODA VS. M/S SHIV OM KNITWEAR AND ANOTHER

¶19

The applicant sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Credit Sanction Intimation dated 02.06.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no. 2 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 87-1/3 Sq. Yards situated at Village Kuliewali, HB no. 178, Raju Colony, Tehsil Ludhiana, Punjab through Original Sale Deed no. 20096 vide Declaration in the matter of Mortgage by Deposit of Title Deed, Letter of Confirmation of Mortgage and Affidavit, all dated 02.06.2022 along with CERSAI, which are Annexure A10 to A12A to this OA. Documents executed: Composite Hypothecation Agreement, Letter of Undertaking, DP Note, Declaration, Letter of Continuing Security and Power of Attorney, all dated 02.06.2022, which are Annexure A4 to A9 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Debt dated 29.06.2024 which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Demand Notice dated 05.07.2024, along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Possession Notice dated 19.09.2024 along with newspaper publication which is Annexure A15 (Colly) to this OA; Statement of Account with certificate, which are Annexure A16 and A17 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.22,49,817.72, 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. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 10.03.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jagroop Singh, Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the

¶20

3 OA NO. 291/2025

¶21

BANK OF BARODA VS. M/S SHIV OM KNITWEAR AND ANOTHER

¶22

Annexure A1 to A17 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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 loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.22,49,817.72 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventeen and Paise Seventy Two Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant has claimed interest 11.85% p.a. (as per Demand Notice u/s 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 dated 05.07.2024) from 15.01.2025 till the realization.

¶24

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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan 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 the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.22,49,817.72 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventeen and Paise Seventy Two Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account 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

¶26

¶27

OA NO. 291/2025

¶28

BANK OF BARODA VS. M/S SHIV OM KNITWEAR AND ANOTHER

¶29

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.

¶30

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 17.04.2026.

¶33

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.

¶34

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶35

Dated: 27.03.2026

¶36

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶37

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Shiv Om Knitwear and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Shiv Om Knitwear and Another

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 Sh. Narinder Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Babu Lal and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Jasvir Singh since deceased through his Lrs

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Banarasi Lal and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Mohinder Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Sukhbir Kaur and Others