Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Anmol Research and Breeding Farm

DRT27 Aug 2026TA/2067/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows an original application filed by Bank of Baroda for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 99,18,793.31 with interest from two defaulting borrowers who failed to repay cash credit facilities. The defaulting respondents were absent, and the tribunal relied on the bank's unchallenged evidence to grant recovery and direct issue of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directive to defendants to pay Rs. 99,18,793.31 along with cost and interest within 30 days; issuance of Recovery Certificate; directive to Recovery Officer.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Anmol Research and Breeding Farm — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Before SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI, Presiding^Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Irelhi

¶2

TA No.2067 OF 2022

¶3

BANK OF BARODA VS M/S^{ANMOL RESEARCH &} BREEDING FARM & ORS

¶4

Reserved on z L5.O7.2O26

¶5

Pronounced on^{: 27.O8.2O26}

¶6

-Applicant bank

¶7

Bank of Baroda Vs.

¶8

M/s Anmol Research^{& Breeding Farm} 2. Ms. Sonia Sabharwal

¶9

Defendants

¶10

Present Shri Chanchal^{Aggarwal,Counselappears for} applicant bank. oeiendans are^{exparte, since, 03.01.2025'}

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

This original application^{has been filed by the} applicant^{bank, on Lz.ll.z}Zlthrough SunilVerma,Chief} Manager of^{the appticant ban( under Section 19 of the} RDB Act,^{1993 againstthe defendants for recovery of a} sum of Rs.99,18,793.31^{together with cost, chargesand} pendentellite and future^{interest @10'10o/o p'a' from date} of filing^{of this O.A. till the realization in full'}

¶13

The brief^{facts of the case are that at the request} of defendant^{no.1 through its proprietor defendantno'2'} the applicant^{bank sanctioned a Cash Credit Loan Facility} of Rs.15,00,000/-,^{vide sanctionletter dated 04'05'2018} under the^{Stand-Up India Scheme' To secure the} aforesaid^{facility, the defendants createdhypothecation} €),

¶14

TANO.2067 of2022 2

¶15

of the stock and book debts^{and hypothecationof birds,} eggs etc. The defendants executed all^{necessary loaning} documents on 04.05.2018. Again, at^{the request of} defendants, the applicant^{bank sanctioneda C-ash Credit} Loan Facility time to time and^{lastly was sanctioned on} 3L.t2.2020 of Rs.13,85,000/-.^{The defendants executed} all necessary loaning documents^{on 31.12.2020. The} defendants have also availed the^{FITL-COVIDLoan of} which account was opened on^{09.09.2020 in which initial} withdrawal was made of Rs.78,663/-.^{Fufthermore, on} the request of defendants, the applicant^{bank also} sanctioned the DLffL GEN-COMP-^{NON-EMILoan of} which account was opened on^{2L.02.2020 in whichthe} initial withdrawal was made of^{Rs.6,22,000/-'}

¶16

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^{requestedthe defendants to} regularize the loan account^{by visits and letters, but there} was no response from^{the defendants' Hence, the} account was classified^{as NPA dated 31.03.2021&} 25.06.202L. The^{presentO.A'ff.A. is preferredby the} appticant bank to^{recover its dues.}

¶17

4.^.On notice by^{this Tribunal, defendants failed to} put appearance at all, despite^{publication.Accordingly,} the defendants were^{proceeded against exparte on} 03.01.202s. ;..

¶18

¶19

TANO.2067 of 2022

¶20

The applicant bank has filed evidence^{by way of} affidavit of Shri. Sunil Verma, Chief Manager of^the applicant bank as Annexure A-1 to Annexure^{A-31, which} have gone unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, the case of the applicant stands fully established against the defendants with respect to nonpayment of outstanding amount.

¶21

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

¶22

In the light of the above discussions, the^present T.A. deserves to be allowed.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

I hereby allow this T.A. of the applicant bank and direct the defendant nos.l and 2 to^{pay jointly and} severally to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs.99,18,793.31 along with cost, expenses and interest @10.10olo from the date of filing of this O.A. which has become T.A till the date of realization.

¶25

In case of failure to deposit the above amount within the stipulated^period, the same shall be^recovered -^-./ +.

¶26

¶27

TANO.2067 of2022

¶28

from the sale of^{hypothecatedassets.In} case of shoft fall, the^{same shall be recoveredfrom the} sale of^{personal movable and immovableassetsof the} defendant nos.l and^2.

¶29

Recovery Certificate^{be issuedforthwith and be sent} to Recovery Officer,^{Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il,Delhi.}

¶30

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

¶31

Pafties are directed^{to appear before the Ld.} Recovery Officer, DRT-II,^{Delhi on 27.L0.2026.Pending} IAs, if any, stand disPosed^of.

¶32

File be consigned to^records.

¶33

:sA

¶34

Date:27.08.2026

¶35

(susHr L rfu Nnn RAsroGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶36

This^judgement has^{been signed, datedand}

¶37

pronounced in oPen couft.

¶38

'''. ' €A

¶39

Date : 27.08.2026

¶40

(susHIL KgplAR RASToGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Anmol Research and Breeding Farm

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Anmol Research and Breeding Farm

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