Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Urban Hub Collection and Another

DRT11 Mar 2026OA/865/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This DRT allowed an application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of a loan of Rs.24,55,858.87 from M/s Urban Hub Collection and its proprietor. The defendants were absent and their case struck off. The Tribunal adjusted the interest rate to 8% per annum and issued a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.24,55,858.87 with simple interest @8% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; liberty to enforce claim via execution.

Canara Bank versus M/S Urban Hub Collection and Another — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.865/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.07.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.03.2026

¶6

Canara Bank, a Banking Company constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (Act No. 5 of 1970) carrying on Banking business and having its Head Office at 112, JC Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560002 and amongst others a Branch at B-19, 399, C1/2, Rani Jhansi Road, Ludhiana141001 through its Manager and General Power of Attorney Shri Ravi Goyal.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Urban Hub Collection, through its Proprietor Sh. Mangat Ram Aiary son of Sh. Hans Raj Aiary, 174/175, Azad

¶10

Nagar, Govind Puri, Bahadur Ke Road, Ludhiana-141008.

¶11

Sh. Mangat Ram Aiary son of Sh. Hans Raj Aiary, Proprietor, M/s Urban Hub Collection, H. No. 3531-A, Street No.16, New Madhopuri, Sunder Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab-141008.

¶12

……….Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Ms. Navneet Kaur, Advocate proxy for Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advocate for Applicant

¶15

Sh. Robin Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. P.S. Miglani, Advocate for Defendants

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.24,55,858.87 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Eight and

¶18

2 OA/865/2025 CANARA BANK VS M/S URBAN HUB COLLECTION AND ANOTHER

¶19

Paise Eighty Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Shri Ravi Goyal, Manager, of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide power of attorney dated 20.03.2018 which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

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.23.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 09.07.2021, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant No.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for renewal of the limit vide Letter of renewal dated 25.10.2022, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Application dated 05.09.2023, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Letter of renewal dated 01.11.2023, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit of Rs.23.00 Lacs vide sanction Letter dated 29.07.2021, which is Annexure A6 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the limit was renewed by the applicant vide sanction letter dated 25.10.2022, which is Annexure A12 to this OA.

¶22

Defendant no. 1 through its proprietor stock and book debts vide Cash Credit Agreement dated 29.07.2021, which is Annexure A8 to this OA. Documents executed: Statements of account along with Certificate under Bankers Book Evidence and IT Act, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA; GST & Udhyam Registration Certificate, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Pronote, Request for Overdraft Facilities, Letter of Undertaking, all dated 29.07.2021, which are Annexures A7, A9 and A10 to this OA; Legal notice dated 03.04.2025, which is Annexure A15 to this OA.

¶23

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a

¶24

3 OA/865/2025

¶25

CANARA BANK VS M/S URBAN HUB COLLECTION AND ANOTHER

¶26

debit of Rs.24,55,858.87, 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.

¶27

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal. Sh. P.S. Miglani, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendants on 11.08.2025 and filed his Power of Attorney on behalf of defendants. However, no WS was filed by defendants and their opportunity to file WS was closed and their defense was struck off vide order dated

¶28

28.01.2026.

¶29

In support of the OA, affidavit of Shri Ravi Goyal, Manager, Canara Bank, has been filed.

¶30

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶31

No arguments were advance by learned proxy counsel for defendants. 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. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A15 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.24,55,858.87 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Eight and Paise Eighty Seven 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.

¶32

4 OA/865/2025 CANARA BANK VS M/S URBAN HUB COLLECTION AND ANOTHER

¶33

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.15%p.a. from date of institution of this application.

¶34

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.

¶35

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.24,55,858.87 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Eight and Paise Eighty Seven 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.

¶36

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

¶39

OA/865/2025

¶40

CANARA BANK VS M/S URBAN HUB COLLECTION AND ANOTHER

¶41

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 30.03.2026.

¶42

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.

¶43

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 11.03.2026

¶44

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. M/S Urban Hub Collection and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Urban Hub Collection 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

Rakesh Jain and Another versus Icici Bank Limited and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Davinder Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh.Gurjant Singh

Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/S Ram Lal & Sons and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Balwinder Singh and Others

Bank of India versus Smt. Ramandeep Kaur Mavi and Another