Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Unique Fashion

DRT27 Jul 2026OA/743/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by a bank for recovery of approximately 35.42 lakhs Rs. owed by a proprietor. The bank proved the loan, default, and notices via documents, and the defendant appeared ex-parte. The court directed payment within 30 days and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs.35,42,785/- with interest within 30 days; recovery certificate issued to Recovery Officer; enforcement from hypothecated goods/parties assets in case of default.

Punjab National Bank versus Unique Fashion — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No.743 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. 743 of 2023

¶5

Punjab National Bank (e-Oriental Bank of Commerce) Circle Sastra North Delhi 2nd Floor, Vikrant Tower Rajendra Place, Delhi-110008 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sh.Gurden Singh Gulati Proprietor of M/s Unique Fashion Reg.office: 226, Ground Floor Mangolpur Khurd, New Delhi-110083

¶8

Also at:

¶9

R/o Flat No.12, Sheetal Apartment, Sector-14, Rohini, Delhi-110085

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Present: Sh.Anshuman Srivastava, Counsel for applicant bank

¶12

Date of Reserve: 09.07.2026

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 27.07.2026

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 21.06.2023 through Shri Vivek Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.35,42,785/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Forty Two Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Five only) as on 31.05.2023 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.25% per annum plus penal interest @2% from

¶16

O.A. No.743 of 2023

¶17

31.05.2023 till its realization in full and costs. Further, the name of Mr.Subhash Chandra Jatav was substituted as AR in place of Shri Vivek Kumar, erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant as proprietor of M/s Unique Fashion, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit (Hyp.) / OD facility of Rs.10.00 lacs (Rupees Ten Lacs only) as working capital and Term Loan facility of Rs.15.00 lacs (Rupees Fifteen Lac only) for purchase of machinery etc. on 09.03.2020 to enhance the business of readymade garments @MCLR interest against hypothecation of goods and book debts. The term loan was to be repaid in 10 half yearly EMIs starting after six months of disbursal covered under CGTMSE scheme. Further, applicant bank sanctioned CECF loan of Rs.1.00 lacs @9.25% interest per annum on 11.05.2020 due to COvid-19 pandemic and GECL loan facility of Rs.3.00 lacs @9.25% interest per annum on 20.06.2020 for purchase of machinery which was to be repaid in 36 instalments after moratorium of 12 months during Covid-19 pandemic as per RBI / Govt. guidelines. In case of default in repayment of interest / instalment, the defendants agreed to pay @2% per annum on the principal amount.

¶19

That in order to avail the loan facilities, the defendant submitted loan application and executed sanction letters, Hypothecation of Goods and Book Debts and Term Loan agreement in favor of the applicant bank on 20.09.2019. In addition, defendant executed Undertaking for Emergency Credit Facility on 22.04.2020 as well as Undertaking, Master Agreement and Promissory Note (PNB-728) on 20.06.2020.

¶20

_CD

¶21

O.A. No.743 of 2023

¶22

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions and failed to maintain financial discipline. Ultimately, the applicant bank calling upon the defendant to pay the entire outstanding dues to the applicant bank but the defendant did not clear the dues; ultimately, the account was classified as NPA by the applicant bank on 31.03.2021 and issued loan recall notice dated 15.07.2022 but no efforts made for regularization of the account, hence approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶23

The defendant acknowledged the debt and signed Balance & Security Confirmation letter dated 19.09.2022 at the branch.

¶24

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite of proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 06.02.2025, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte & no affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendant.

¶25

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 13.01.2023 was issued to the defendant calling upon them to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank but the defendant willfully neglected and failed to pay the overdue amount.

¶26

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Vivek Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney, Sanction Letters,

¶27

O.A. No.743 of 2023

¶28

Hypothecation of Goods and Book Debts to secure Cash Credit Facility, Term Loan Agreement, Loan Application for CECF limit, Undertaking for CECF, Sanction of GECL facility, Undertaking, Master Agreement, Promissory Note (PNB-728), Recall Notice, Balance and Security Confirmation Letter, Certificate under section 2A of Bankers' Evidence Act, Statement of both the Accounts marked as Ex.AW1/1 to Ex.AW1/15 (colly).

¶29

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 proved.

¶30

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts

¶31

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

¶32

ORDER

¶33

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.35,42,785/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Forty Two Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Five only) as on 31.05.2023 together with pendentelite and future interest @11.25% per annum with monthly rest from 01.06.2023 till the date of its realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated goods, machinery & book debts. In case of shortfall / default, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable property/assets of the defendant.

¶34

O.A. No.743 of 2023

¶35

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

¶36

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 25.09.2026.

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 27.07.2026

Punjab National Bank v. Unique Fashion

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Unique Fashion

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

Yes Bank versus Mr Dinesh Damodhar Marsattiwar

Hdfc Bank versus Kaushalya Chandel

Sri Sisir Sen And Anr. versus Idbi Bank

Canara Bank versus Anjali Plastic

Indusind Bank Limited versus Oplos Medicare Pharmaceuticals Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Nng Import Export Pvt. Ltd.