Allowed

Uco Bank v. M/S Laxmi Sweet and Dairy

DRT12 Jan 2026TA/1750/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues. Bonds and security were duly executed, but defendants failed to repay, leading to their ex-parte default. The Tribunal directed recovery from securities and properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.26,86,623 plus interest and costs within 30 days; failure leads to recovery from sale of hypothecated stocks, receivables, mortgaged property, and other assets.

Uco Bank versus M/S Laxmi Sweet and Dairy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.1750 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. 1750 of 2022

¶5

UCO Bank

¶6

Ayodhya Chowk, Sector — 7 Rohini, Delhi-110085 Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Laxmi Sweets & Dairy Through its sole proprietress Shop No.3/210, Ground Floor,

¶9

Out of Khasra No.642, Village Chandrawali Shandara, Delhi-110032

¶10

Smt. Nisha Goswami w/o Saurabh Giri R/o 139, Top Floor, Jawahar Nagar Shandara, Delhi-110032 Defendants

¶11

Present: Shri Nisha Chauhan, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶12

Date of Reserve: 19.12.2025

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 12.01.2026

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 13.06.2022 before DRT-III Delhi & DRT-I Delhi under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.26,86,623/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three only) as on 31.01.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @10.00% per annum with monthly rest from 01.02.2022 till the date of realization and costs.

¶16

T.A. No.1750 of 2022

¶17

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor being defendant no.2, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit limit of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs only) under MSME on 08.06.2018 @9.70 interest per annum against hypothecation of entire stocks and receivables for working capital requirements. Due to Covid 19 pandemic, the applicant bank sanctioned additional Working Capital Term Loan under GECL scheme for Rs.3.78 lacs (Rupees Three lacs Seventy Eight Thousand only) on 16.07.2020 @7.50% interest to be repayable in 36 EMIs guaranteed by NCGTC.

¶18

That in order to avail the loan facilities, the defendants submitted loan applications and executed Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Waiver, Letter of Continuity, Hypothecation of Goods to Secure Demand Cash Credit, Term Loan Agreement etc. on 08.06.2018 & 16.07.2020 in favour of applicant bank.

¶19

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendants hypothecated the stock and receivable in favour of applicant bank and created equitable mortgage over the property bearing no.3/210, Out of Khasra No.642, Gali Gangaram, Chhota Bazar, Shandara, Delhi admeasuring 22.22 sq.yds. owned by defendant no.2 in favour of applicant bank by depositing original title deeds.

¶20

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the credit facilities, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and failed to pay the interest as per terms of sanction. The applicant bank issued various notices to defendants for regularization of the account but neglected by defendants, thus applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.03.2021 as per RBI guidelines but defendants failed to

¶21

T.A. No.1750 of 2022

¶22

clear the dues, hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶23

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 10.09.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶24

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Ms. Abha Jolly, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Board Resolution, Loan Applications, Statement of Means, Sanction Letters, Promissory Notes A-1, Letters of Waiver, Letter of Continuity, Hypothecation of Goods, Sanction of Additional Working Capital Term Loan facility, Agreement relating to Term Loan, Sale Deed of Mortgaged Property, Notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, Statement of Accounts, Interest Certificate, Certificate by Manager in Charge of Computer System marked as Ex.AW1/1 to Ex.AW1/17.

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

T.A. No.1750 of 2022

¶28

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

¶29

ORDER

¶30

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.26,86,623/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three only) as on 31.01.2022 together with pendentelite and future interest @10% per annum with monthly rests from 01.02.2022 till the date of realization with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of the hypothecated stocks and receivables etc. & sale of mortgaged property bearing no.3/210, Out of Khasra No.642, Gali Gangaram, Chhota Bazar, Shandara, Delhi owned by defendant no.2. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶31

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

¶32

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 12.03.2026.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 12.01.2026

Uco Bank v. M/S Laxmi Sweet and Dairy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. M/S Laxmi Sweet and Dairy

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

Canara Bank versus Sreelatha

Idbi Bank versus M/S Gandhi Tent House

Smt Nafeesa Sultana versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus Gurdas Ram @ Gurdas Chand @ Gurdas Singh (Since Deceased)

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kartar Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Anand Prakash Ajay Kumar