Allowed

Axis Bank Ltd. v. M/S Sardari Cuisine and Another

DRT2 Jul 2026OA/586/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal examined an original application filed by Axis Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues from M/s 143 Sardari Cuisine. The respondent failed to appear and testify. The Tribunal declared the amount due, adjusted interest to 8% per annum, and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued declaring liability to pay Rs. 1,13,43,404.64 with 8% p.a. simple interest upon attachment and sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/S Sardari Cuisine and Another — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 586/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.05.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 02.07.2026

¶6

AXIS BANK LIMITED (earlier known as UTI Bank Limited), a banking company, carrying on the banking business under the Banking Regulation Act 1949, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at "Trishul", 3rd Floor, Opposite Samartheshwar Temple, Law Garden, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad-380006, Gujarat and one of its branch offices amongst other places known as Axis Bank Ltd. situated in SCO No. 390, 2nd Floor, Sector 20, Panchkula through its Manager, Sh. Nitish Aggarwal.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s 143 Sardari Cuisine through its Proprietor, having its Registered Office at Ground Floor, B-21/5996/2, Street No. 8, Daba Road, District Ludhiana, Punjab-141001.

¶10

Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh S/o Sh. Kewal Singh, Proprietor M/s Sardari Cuisine, R/o Ground Floor, B-21/5996/2, Street No. 8, Daba Road, District Ludhiana, Punjab-141001.

¶11

…….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Sukhwinder Singh Chaudhary, Advocate proxy for Sh. Guarav Gupta, Advocate for Applicant. None for Defendants

¶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.1,13,43,404.64 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lac Forty Three Thousand Four Hundred Four and Paise Sixty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Nitish

¶16

¶17

OA/586/2025 AXIS BANK LIMITED VS. M/S SARDARI CUISINE AND ANOTHER

¶18

Aggarwal , Manager, of the Applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney of Bank Official dated 24.08.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the Defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, approached the applicant for sanction of CC Limit of Rs38.00 lac vide Loan Application dated 18.04.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Thereafter, Defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, approached the applicant for enhancement of CC Limit from Rs.38.00 lac to Rs.70.00 lac. Thereafter, Defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, again approached the applicant for enhancement of CC Limit from Rs.70.00 lac to 110.00 lacs vide Loan Application dated 13.06.2023, which is Annexure A14 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the CC Limit of Rs.38.00 lac, vide Sanction Letter dated 20.04.2022, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the enhancement of CC Limit from Rs.38.00 lac to Rs.70.00 lac vide Sanction Letter dated 17.10.2022, which is Annexure A9 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the enhancement of CC Limit from Rs.70.00 lac to Rs. 110.00 lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 05.07.2023, which is Annexure A15 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the renewal of CC Limit of Rs. 110.00 lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 09.07.2024, which is Annexure A20 to this OA. 4. Defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, hypothecated its stock and book debts vide Deed of Hypothecation dated 26.04.2022, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Deed of Hypothecation dated 17.10.2022, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Deed of Hypothecation dated 21.07.2023, which is Annexure A17 to this OA. Documents executed: Firm Registration Certificate dated 06.02.2021, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Facility Agreement dated 22.04.2022,

¶19

¶20

OA/586/2025 AXIS BANK LIMITED VS. M/S SARDARI CUISINE AND ANOTHER

¶21

which is Annexure A5 to this OA; D.P. Note dated 26.04.2022, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; D.P. Note Delivery-cum-Waiver dated 26.04.2022, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Facility Agreement dated 17.10.2022, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; D.P. Note dated 17.10.2022, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; D.P. Note Deliverycum-Waiver dated 17.10.2022, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Facility Agreement dated 21.07.2023, which is Annexure A16 to this OA; D.P. Note dated 21.07.2023, which is Annexure A18 to this OA; D.P. Note Delivery-cum-Waiver dated 21.07.2023, which is Annexure A19 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Letter dated 09.07.2024, which is Annexure A21 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 07.03.2025, which is Annexure A22 to this OA; Statement of Account along with Certificate, which is Annexure A23 to this OA.

¶22

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, there was a debit of Rs.1,13,43,404.64 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lac Forty Three Thousand Four Hundred Four and Paise Sixty Four Only), 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 summons to appear before this Tribunal and after the service of summons, Sh. Sushant Sharma appeared on behalf of defendants on 06.09.2025. Power of Attorney on behalf of defendants was filed on 20.11.2025. Paper book was supplied on 02.04.2026. Thereafter, no WS was filed on behalf of defendants within or even after expiry of stipulated period. Therefore, opportunity to file WS by defendants was closed and defense was struck of vide order dated 29.06.2026.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Nitish Aggarwal , Manager, AXIS Bank Limited, has been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record.

¶24

¶25

OA/586/2025 AXIS BANK LIMITED VS. M/S SARDARI CUISINE AND ANOTHER

¶26

It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶27

None was appeared on behalf of defendants for arguments.

¶28

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A23 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, approached the applicant for availing of the loan facility, which was granted to them. 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.1,13,43,404.64 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lac Forty Three Thousand Four Hundred Four and Paise Sixty 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.

¶29

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.50% p.a. with half yearly rests from 06.03.2025 till the realization.

¶30

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, 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 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.

¶31

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.1,13,43,404.64 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lac Forty Three

¶32

¶33

OA/586/2025 AXIS BANK LIMITED VS. M/S SARDARI CUISINE AND ANOTHER

¶34

Thousand Four Hundred Four and Paise Sixty Four 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 assets 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.

¶35

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 17.07.2026

¶38

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 .

¶39

Dated: 02.07.2026.

¶40

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶41

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Axis Bank Ltd. v. M/S Sardari Cuisine and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Axis Bank Ltd. v. M/S Sardari Cuisine 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

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Deep Garments and Another

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Renu Sharma and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Gurjot Singh

Yes Bank Ltd. versus M/S Vohra Trading Company and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Home Need Department Store and Others

Idfc Bank Limited versus Naib Singh and Another