Synthetics Limited and other (defendants) in the Civil Court Jammu. However, vide order dated 30.04.2024, this suit was transferred by the Court of Principal District Judge, Jammu, to DRT-I, Chandigarh. 2. Bank’s case is that on 08.02.1997, it had sanctioned the following credit facilities to Defendant No.1: - C.C. Hypothecation Limit of Rs.70.00 lacs C.C. Pledge of Rs.50.00 lacs Bill Purchase/Bill Discount of Rs.30.00 lacs Bank Guarantee of Rs.10.00 lacs Foreign Letter of Credit/Inland of Rs.100.00 lacs. The Board of Directors, vide resolution dated 08.02.1997, had authorized Defendant No.2 to execute the documents on behalf of Defendant No.1. To secure the loan, defendants had created security interest in favour of the Bank by mortgaging their properties, fully detailed in Para Nos.4, 5, 14(a), (b), (c) and (d) of the suit. As per Bank, Defendant Nos.2 to 5 are directors and guarantors, who had executed the documents and the guarantee deed on 11.02.1997. Defendant Nos.6 and 7 were also the guarantors and had executed the guarantee deed on 11.02.1997. Since the defendants did not make the repayment, on 01.12.1999, Bank of Baroda filed the suit for the recovery of Rs.2,29,40,511/-. 3. During the pendency of the TA, defendants had filed IA No.1150 of 2024, which was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 17.04.2025. In the said IA, defendants had admitted the principal amount due. However, they had raised a dispute regarding the rate of interest. 4. It appears that defendants had created security interest in respect of some of their properties in favour of other creditors, and the Bank had second charge over the said properties. The other creditors had sold the property(ies) of the defendants, and there was a surplus amount of Rs.6,22,85,321/-. There were also some proceedings before the Hon’ble
