Allowed

Syndicate Bank v. Sh. Deepak Kumar

DRT28 Jul 2026TA/1626/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an original application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, filed by Syndicate Bank for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 12,75,875.38 along with interest. The tribunal noted the defendants were absent and their case remained unchallenged. The application was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to jointly and severally pay Rs. 12,75,875.38 along with cost and interest @10.25% p.a. within 30 days.

Syndicate Bank versus Sh. Deepak Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Before SUSHIL^{KUMAR RASTOGI,Presiding Officer} Debts RecovetY Tribunal-Il,^Delhi

¶2

TA No.1526 OF 2022

¶3

SYNDICATE^{BANK VS SH. DEEPAKIruMAR & OR.S}

¶4

Reserved on : 16.O6.2O26

¶5

Pronounced on : 28.07.2O26

Syndicate Bank

-Applicant bank

Vs.

Sh. Deepak Kumar

¶10

Sh. Binod Kumar

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Present: Mr. Sanjeev Chopra,^{Counsel appearsfor} applicant bank. Defendant no.1^{is exparte, since, 05'10.2016.} Defendant no.2^{is exparte, since, 04.07.2025.}

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

This original application^{has been filed by the} applicant bank,^{on 16'03.2016through Mr. Rajeev Jagota,} Senior Branch^{Managerand PrincipalOfficer of the} applicant bank, under^{Section 19 of the RDB Act,1993} against the defendants^{for recoveryof a sum of} Rs.12,75,875.38^{together with cost, chargesand} pendentellite and future^interest @18.05o/o^{p'a' from date} of filing of this^{O.A' till the realization in full'}

¶15

The brief^{facts of the case are that the defendant} no.1 who is the^{proprietor of M/s Shri. Sai Book &} Stationery, has^{been banking with the applicantbank} since 2010 when^{they weresanctioned SOD Limit of} Rs.6,00,000 against^{hypothecation of stocks of books and}

¶16

€.\

¶17

TANO. 1626of2022 2

¶18

stationery items and deposit of VCC of^{Rs.2.00 Lacs as} collateral seurity and execution of^{loan documents.} While the liabilities under the above said limit^{were still} subsisting the request to enhance the limit^was considered and the applicant bank on^09.04.2013 enhanced the limit from Rs.6,00,000 to^Rs.9,00,000 against execution of loan documents,^{guarantee of} defendant no.2, hypothecation of^{stocks of booksand} stationary execution of^{loan documents.The defendans} executed all necessary^{loaning documents on 09.04.2013}

¶19

It is further submitted that^{the defendants enjoyed} and utilized the Loan^{facilities, but failed to maintain the} financial discipline and^failed to^{repay the due amounts.} The applicant bank requested^{the defendants to} regularize the loan account^{by visits and letters, but there} was no response from the^{defendants.The applicant} bank served a legal notice^{dated13.02'2016to the} defendants but failed^{to recoverthe same Thus, the} present O.A.ff.A. is preferred by the^{applicant bank to} recover its dues.

¶20

On notice by^{this Tribunal, defendant no.1 failed to} put appearance at all, despite service'^{Accordingly, the} defendant no.l was^{proceededagainst exparteon} 05.10.2016. The defendant^{no.2 failed to put appearance} at all, despite^{issuance of default notice. Accordingly,the} defendant no.2^{was proceededagainst exparteon} 04.07.2025.

¶21

The applicant^{bank has filed documents along with} O.A. as Paper^{No.1 to Papq No'64, which have gone} qI .

¶22

¶23

TANO. 1626 of 2022

¶24

unchallenged and^{un- rebutted.Hence, the case} of the applicant^{stands fully established against the} defendants with^{respect to nonpayment of outstanding} amount.

¶25

After^{perusing the records, this Tribunal is of the} view that the applicant^{bank has proved its case beyond} reasonable doubts.^{The documenb fited by the applicant} bank not^{rebutted by the defendants by not placing any} evidence and^{there is no question of disbelievingthe} documents filed^{by the applicantbank based upon the} written/printed^documents.

¶26

In the light of^{the above discussions,the presentT'A'} deserves to^{be allowed.}

¶27

ORDER

¶28

I hereby^{allow this T.A. of the applicant bank and} direct the defendant^{nos.l and 2 to pay jointlyand} severally to^{the applicant bank within30 days from today'} a sum of^{Rs.12,75,875.38 along with cost, expenses and} interest @10.25olo^{from the date of filing of this O'A'} which has become^{T'A till the date of realization'}

¶29

In case^{of failure to deposit the aboveamount} within the^{stipulated period, the same shall be recovered} from the sale^{of hypothecated assets' In caseof shortfall'} the same shall^{be recovered from the sale of personal} movable and^{immovableassets of the defendant nos'l} and 2. sI

¶30

TANO. 1626of2022⁴

¶31

Remvery^{Certificatebe issuedforthwith and be} sent to Recovery^{Officer,DebtsRecovery Tribunal-Il,} Delhi.

¶32

The registry^{of this Tribunal is hereby directedto} issue free copy of^{the order and send the same to both} the^parties.

¶33

Parties are^{directed to appearbefore the Ld'} Recovery Officer,^{DRT-II, Delhi on 28.09.2026'Pending} lAs, if any,^{stand disPosed of.}

¶34

Fite be consigned^{to records.}

¶35

¶36

Date : 28.07.2025^{(susHIL KUMAR RASTOGI)} PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶37

This^{judgement has been signed, dated and}

¶38

pronounced in oPen court. .--.--.--._-.'.,..,

¶39

SA Date i 28.07.2026 (susHIL KUMAR RASToGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Syndicate Bank v. Sh. Deepak Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syndicate Bank v. Sh. Deepak Kumar

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