Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Centre of Excellence

DRT22 Jan 2026TA/1501/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Punjab National Bank for recovery of dues against a sole proprietorship. The defendant was proceeded ex-parte due to absence, and the court directed payment of the outstanding amount within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendant to pay Rs.45,22,839.75 plus interest within 30 days; recovery from sale of assets if default persists.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Centre of Excellence — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.1501 of 2022

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 1501 of 2022

¶5

Punjab National Bank Circle Sastra East Delhi, First floor CSC, E-Block, Mayur Vihar Phase II, New Delhi-110091

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

• M/s Centre of Excellence Through its Proprietor Ms. Navita Sharma Flat no.124, GF, Sector 28 Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301

¶9

Also at:

¶10

M/s Centre of Excellence A-18, Sector A-3 Tronica City, Ghaziabad, UP-201001

¶11

Also at:

¶12

M/s Centre of Excellence [472, Duplex, Radha Kunj, Brij Vihar Ghaziabad, UP-201001 Defendant

¶13

Present: Shri Naman Shukla, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Reserve: 05.01.2026

¶15

Date of Pronouncement: 22.01.2026

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 13.06.2018 before DRT-III Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I, Delhi under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a

¶18

¶19

T.A. No.1501 of 2022

¶20

sum of Rs.45,22,839.75 (Rupees Forty Five Lacs Twenty two Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Nine and paisa Seventy Five only) as on 11.06.2018 alongwith future interest @11.25% in Cash Credit account and @11.75% in Term Loan account with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of its realization and costs. The defendant also agreed to pay penal interest @2% per annum in case of default or delay in repayment.

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant being sole proprietorship concern of Ms Navita Sharma in the business of manufacturing denim wear vide application dated 08.02.2025, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility for Rs.40.00 Lacs (Rupees Forty lacs only) for working capital requirement and Term Loan of Rs.10.00 Lacs on 07.03.2015 against hypothecation of stocks, book debts and plant & machinery to be purchased covered under CGTMSE scheme.

¶22

That in order to avail the credit facility, the defendant submitted loan application and executed Term Loan Agreement PNB-0639, Agreement of Hypothecation of Movable Assets PNB-884, Hypothecation of Goods and Book Debts, Form No.PNB-222-788, Undertaking Declaration with the applicant bank on 07.03.2015.

¶23

The defendant acknowledged and executed Balance and Security Confirmation Letters dated 06.08.2016, 24.02.2017 and 03.01.2018 with the applicant bank.

¶24

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and regularize the account

¶25

¶26

T.A. No.1501 of 2022

¶27

with applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 16.04.2018 as per RBI guidelines but defendant failed to regularize the account. Hence, the applicant bank approached this tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶28

Notice under section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 23.05.2018 was issued to the defendant calling upon them to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank.

¶29

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite proper service the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 27.09.2023, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶30

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed various documents such as Loan application, Sanction Letter, Term Loan Agreement, Agreement for Hypothecation of Movable Assets, Hypothecation of Goods and Book Debts, Undertaking Declaration, Review Letters, Balance & Security Confirmation Letters, Notice u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, Statement of Account and General Power of Attorney marked as from page no.1 to 92.

¶31

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.

5C -1-

T.A. No.1501 of 2022

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

¶36

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

¶37

ORDER

¶38

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days a sum of Rs.45,22,839.75 (Rupees Forty Five Lacs Twenty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Nine and paisa Seventy Five only) as on 11.06.2018 along with pendentelite and future interest @11.75% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till its realization with costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stocks, book debts and plant & machinery etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendant.

¶39

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

¶40

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, De:hi on 23.03.2026.

¶41

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

¶42

c sd 0 )-6 (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶43

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 22.01.2026

¶44

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Centre of Excellence

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M/S Centre of Excellence

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

Central Bank of India versus MD Rafikul Islam and Anr.

Punjab National Bank versus Oly Pramanik

Bank of Baroda versus M/s S.K. Enterprises

Indian Bank versus Mrs Sonal Rathi Proprietor of M/S Rathi Commodities and Ors.

Idbi Bank versus M/s Rahul Electric

Bank of India versus M/s Humara Pump Ram Janki