Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/s Jai Mata Di Trading

DRT5 Sept 2026OA/491/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal, Patna allowed an application filed by Bank of Baroda under Section 19 of the RDB Act to recover dues from three defendants, who failed to appear. The Tribunal accepted the bank's documentary evidence establishing the loan facility, security creation, and the outstanding amount of approximately Rs. 3.27 Crores. An ex-parte order was passed, Money Debt, determining the liability and directing the issuance of a recovery certificate for joint and several recovery with interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate directed to be drawn up for joint and several recovery of Rs. 3,27,25,922.97 along with interest at 12% p.a. compounded monthly from 26.06.2025 till realization with costs.

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Jai Mata Di Trading — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

OA 491 of 20251 Jl

DRT, PATNA

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶5

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶6

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶7

OA Case No. 491 of 2025

¶8

Bank of Baroda, Branch Office at Bhagalpur, Dr. R.P. Road- 812001,

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1 M/s Jai Mata Di Trading, a Proprietorship Concern through its Proprietor Amit Kumar Choudhary, S/o Chhote Lal Jaiswal, VidaYa Girl's Hostel, Shivaji Path, S.M. College Path, Chhoti Khanjarpur, Bhagalpur9 Bihar- 812001, PAN- AFOPC 1681 G- [Borrower Firm]

¶11

2 Amit Kumar Chaudhary, S/o- Chhote Lal Chaudhary, Resident of Vidaya Girl’s Hostel, Shivaji Path, S.M. College Path, Chhoti Khanjarpur9 Bhagalpur, Bihar-812001, PAN- AFOPC1681G [Borrower & Mortgagor]

¶12

Dilip Kumar Jaiswal, S/o- Chhote Lal Jaiswal, resident of Flat No. 4/Lotus A/3Q Building, Aditya Garden City, Mumbai Bangalore Highway, Wade near RMD Singhad College, Pune City, Pune, Maharashtra- 411058, at present- S.M. College Road, Shivaji Path, Chhoti Khanjarpur, Bhagalpur-812001, [Guarantor & Mortgagor]

¶13

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶14

Present:

¶15

For the Applicant Shri Manish Kishore, Advocate For the Defendants None

¶16

Dated:05.09.2026

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 26.06.2025 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.3,27,25,922.97 as on 14.06.2025 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 15.06.2025 with costs till realization.

CeF

BrCaATRb

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank.9 is a body corporates carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant.

¶24

3 . Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship firm of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanction of cash credit for working capital facility of Rs.300 Lakh, vide loan application dated 03.02.2020, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 03.02.2020 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created equitable mortgage of Apartment and Lien over fixed deposits of h.20 Lakh in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA

¶25

There were some discrepancies in creation of mortgage hence in order to rectify the mistake flesh mortgage documents were executed on 14.07.2021 in presence of defendants No.2 and 3, who marked their presence on 14.07.2021 and Memorandum was prepared recording deposit of title deed. The defendants No.2 and 3 executed Annexure-A and Annexure-B, Declaration on Affidavit regarding creation of mortgage by deposit of title deed and also confirmed deposit of the title deed.

¶26

The borrower was eligible for additional working capital term loan during Covid-19 hence the defendant no.2 made request by letter dated 29.11.2021 extra fund i.e 30% of the sanctioned amount under BGECL Scheme to build up current assets for working capital requirement and to meet out liquidity mismatch. The said request was accepted by the Applicant Bank and accordingly sanctioned Rs.90 Lakh as Additional Working Capital Term Loan on 30.11.202 1 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created/extended equitable mortgage in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA. n /

¶27

n / <

¶28

Al hbo Rf !::L +db’') P

DRT, PATNA

OA 491 of 20251JI

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities, the defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 30.04.2025 .

¶33

Since, the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶34

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.3,27,25,922.97 as on 14.06.2025 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 15.06.2025 till the realization.

¶35

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 15.07.2025, requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993. But the defendants have not appeared, hence, the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently, substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 20.09.2025 in “Prabhat Khabar” and “Hindustan Times” newspapers.

¶36

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice h newspaper, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 06.05.2026

¶37

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Krishna Murari Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶38

Description Documents of	1Date .of 6n	IAmount (in	ISignature of Executants	1Ex./ Ann
Photocopies				No

OA 491 of20251JI

DRT, PATN A

1	Loanappli with other re laDers	cation levant	103.02.2020	300.00	1Def.no.l&2	1
2	Sir			a	na Defendants
3	Letter of lroprietorshi	sole	03.02.2020		e
4	DPnote		03.02.2020	e		4
5	Letter ofconti securi	nuing	03.02.2020	e		5
6	Composite hypothecation agreement		03.02.2020	e		6
7	)bT		03.02.2020	e		7
8	General for :uarantee	mof	03.02.2020	e		8
9	Ic undertaking authorit	cum	03.02.2020	e		9
10	Powerofattorn	e'	03.02.2020		Def.no.I&2	10
11	Letter dep fixed/shortdep	ositing osit	05.02.2020	e		11
12	General undert	aking	03.02.2020	300.00	Def.no.1&2	12
13	, Undertakin		03.02.2020	300.00	Def.no.I&2	13
14	Annexure- A		03.02.2020	I 300.00	Def.no.2&3	14
15	Annexure-B		03.02.2020	300.00	Def.no.2&3	15
16	Memorandum enb		03.02.2020	300.00	Bank	16
17	Photocopy deed	sale	10.01.2011			17
18	Declaration		03.02.2020	e		18
19	Letter confirmation mortgage		03.02.2020	e		19
20	Annexure- A		14.07.2021	e		20
21	Annexure-B		14.07.2021	e		21
22	Memorandum ent		14.07.2021	a		22
23	Declaration		14.07.2021	e		23
24	Letter confirmation mortgage	of of	14.07.2021	e		24
25	Reque;tm		29.11.2021		Def.no.1&2	25
26	Detailed conditions terms	and		e		26
27	Letterof roprietorshi	sole	30.11.2021		Def.no.1&2	27
28	DPNote		30.1 1.2021	e		28
29	Letter ofinstall	ment	30.1 1.2021	e		29
30	Loan hypothecation agreement	cum	30.1 1.2021	e		30
31	Le		30.1 1.2021	e		31
32	Declaration undertakin!	ctllrl cum	30.11.2021	e 90.00		32

¶43

Fr baDve bebw '' FATNA

OA 491 of20251JI

DRT, PATNA

	authorit'
33	Letter of exten of mortgage depositof titlede	sion by eds	30.11.2021	300.00 90.00	1Bank	33
	Annexure-A		30.11.2021	e
	Annexure-B		30.11.2021	e
	Letter confirmation creation/extensio mortgage	of of nof	I	e
37	Letter acknowledgeme debt	of ntof	3 1 .01.2023		e
38 series	Notice		24.07.2023 10 05.03.2024		k
e			28.03.2024		Bank
c					Def.no.I&2
e	mci		04.04.2025		Bank
e			03.05.2025		Bank
a	accounts				Bank	43&44

¶48

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶49

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶50

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶51

It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

OA 491 of 20251Jl

DRT, PATNA

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 30.04.2025, whereas the present application has been filed on 26.06.2025. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶57

Shri Krishna Murari Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant bank has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶58

Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (1) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶59

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant, the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶60

The rule 12 (11) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker’s Books evidence that Act, 1891 (18 of 1891) shall apply to a certified copy of an entry in a Banker’s Books furnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶61

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certified copy of any entry in a banker’s book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶62

As such the certified true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence. The statement of account maintained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

OA 491 of 2025jJl

DRT, PATNA

15 . On perusal of the application, documents, affidavit and on consideration of the arguments, it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account.

¶68

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O. A., was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 14.06.2025 has been proved to be Rs.3,27,25,922.97 only by way of statement of accounts. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶69

In my view, facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly, the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.3,27,25,922.97 along with pendente-lite and fUture interest @ 12% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 26.06.2025 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶70

ORDER

¶71

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.3,27,25,922.97 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 12% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 26.06.2025 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶72

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶73

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any La. >$

¶74

t : q + 41!Pr f 1r ? ? gr :J!! : : 1 1 P R 1 P P. i. Wi

OA 491 of2025jJl

DRT, PATNA

other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery C'ertificate before the Registrar/Sub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets.

¶79

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants. The Recovery Of'icer witt issue demand notice to the CertifIcate debtors only after the proof of compliance under rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules 1993, is submitted by the applicant. If The Applicant /Cert$cate holder fails to comply with directions of the Recovery Oficer, the execution may be dismissed for non-prosecution. The copy of this judgment be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.

¶80

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 22.10.2026. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶81

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 05th day of September, 2026.

¶82

Dictated & corrected by me.

¶83

[Kaushalendra Yadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶84

c_ UP

D&l)w KenJI TrI 'UII

FORM NO. 9

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶89

[See Regulation 24( 1 )]

¶90

2nd Floor, (A. B & F wbg) K3Quri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road Patna-800025'

¶91

ER SECTION 19(7) REA

¶92

,, AS A BI ()) ro TINI

RC,' No. 277/2026 IN

Case No: OA/491/2025

In the Matter of:

(CH- 1) BANK OF BARODA

¶97

BRANCH OFFICE AT- BHAGALPUR DR. R.P. ROAD BHAGALPUR ,BIHAR -8 12001

¶98

Applicant(s)

¶99

¶100

(CD- 1) M/S JAI MATA DI TRADING A PRPRIETORSHIP CONCERN THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AMIT KUMAR CHOUDHARY) S/0CHHOTE LAL JAISWAL VIDAYA GIRLS HOSTEL) SHIVAJI PATH SM COLLEGE PATH CHHOTI KHANJARPUR

¶101

Bhagalpur ,BIHAR -8 12001

¶102

(CD_ 2) AMiT KUMAR CHAUDHARY S/O_ CHHOTE LAL CHAUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VIDAYA GIRL'S HOSTEL, SHIVAJI PATH, S.M. (-'OLLEGE PATH, CHHOTI KHANJARPUR, BHAGALPUR. BIHAR- 8 1200 1 . PAN- AFOPC 168 IG (BORROWER AND MORTGAGOR)

¶103

Defendant(s)

¶104

(CD. 3) DILIP KUMAR JAISWAL S/0- CHHOTE LAL JAISWAL, RESIDENT OF FLAT NO- 4/ LOTUS A/JQ BUILD[NG ADITYA GARDEN CITY. MUMBAI BANGALORE HIGHWAY, WARJE NEAR RMD SINGHAD COLLEGE, PUNE CITY, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA - 411058 AT PRESENT S.M, COLLEGE ROAD. SHIVAJI PATH CHOTI KHANJARPUR BHAGALPUR- 812001

¶105

(GUARANTORrMORTGAGOR) PAN- AFBPJ998 IM

¶106

Recover\r Certificate for Rs 3272

¶107

And Paige Ninety Seven Only_I

¶108

In terms of final order chted 05/09/2026 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the Applicant Certiticate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 32725922.97 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 26/06/2025 i.e. date of fiIIng / with effective date of the OA/491/2025 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certiticate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶109

CD Name	IInt. WpdMode	Int. Rate		Liability Type	Interest(as on Order Date)
	11 Interest Monthly)	12		FJointlyAnd ISevuaUy	Interest As IE; i
MITKUMAR UDHARY	:Monthly)		2725922.97		lterist As Order
DILIPKUMAR ISWAL				lintly And iSeverally

¶110

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.

¶111

The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993.

¶112

Putics arc directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR , Recovery Ofnccr, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 22/10/2026.

¶113

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amenaed from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors.

¶114

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 09/09/2026

¶115

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶116

Gb RegIstrar Nunn Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna wlaWt31ftqTW. nTI

¶117

FORM NO. 10

¶118

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶119

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶120

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025 .

¶121

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 277/2026

Case No: OA/491/2025

Applicant(s): BANK OF BARODA Versus

¶126

Defendant(s): M/S JAI MATA DI TRADING

¶127

	Item ofCosts	i Amount inRs
	'eeontheapplication	150000
2	’rocessFees(Inc. Publication)	ro
	AdvocateFees	[0
	r/ReceivermmMRJFii	[0
5	s	bc
	Total Costs: Rs	15mo

Place: PATNA

PRESIDING OFFICER

Date: 09/09/2026

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

¶132

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶133

rid& t - ti iiB tJ if lb &d B B iE3 Lab jIbreI SrT:iII:iI 11Eht r jLIE1111:lun

Bank of Baroda v. M/s Jai Mata Di Trading

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/s Jai Mata Di Trading

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

Canara Bank versus Sahruk Trading Co. and Anr.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Eranna Alias Eranna Devarmani

City Union Bank Limited versus Ms Rajdeep Tissues

State Bank of India versus M/S R R Brothers

Canara Bank versus Deeyog Metal Pvt. Ltd.

Poonam Kushwaha versus Sammaan Capital Limited