Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Nikha Ornaments

DRT10 Jun 2026TA/224/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal affirmed the applicant bank's claim for recovery of ₹65,67,928/- with interest advanced to the defendants, who appeared ex parte, allowing the case and directing issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The applicant bank's case for recovery of ₹65,67,928/- with interest is allowed; liability is joint and several; recovery certificate issued; parties to appear before Recovery Officer.

Canara Bank versus M/S Nikha Ornaments — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

TA No: 224/2023 Date of Institution: 04.03.2016 Date of Decision: 10.06.2026

¶4

Canara Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Budshah Chowk, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

M/s Nikha Ornaments, Cement Kadal, Noor Bagh, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, through its proprietor Ishfaq Ahmad Zargar.

¶8

Ishfaq Ahmad Zargar s/o Bashir Ahmad Zargar, r/o Guzer Chowk, Nowshera, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Ms. Meena Malhotra proxy counsel for Sh. Sumit Batra, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants- ex parte vide order dated 04.02.2026 .

¶13

TA for the Recovery of ₹65,67,928/- with interest @12.65% per annum with monthly rests from 04.03.2016.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

On 04.03.2016, Canara Bank filed the suit for the recovery of ₹65,67,928/- with interest against M/s Nikha Ornaments and another (defendants) in the Civil Court Jammu. However, vide order dated 27.02.2023, this suit was transferred by the Court of Additional District Judge, (Bank Cases), Srinagar, to DRT-I, Chandigarh.

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 06.07.2011, it had granted O.C.C. Limit of ₹5.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor defendant No.2 for business purpose. Again on 27.06.2013, at the request of the defendants, bank enhanced the O.C.C. Limit from ₹5.00 Lacs to ₹10.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter, (Annexure P-8). Again on 11.04.2014, at the request of

¶17

¶18

the defendants, bank again enhanced the existing limit from ₹10.00 Lacs to ₹40.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter, (Annexure P13). Again on 25.11.2014, at the request of the defendants, applicant bank restructured the O.C.C. Limit and granted a WCTL of ₹10.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor defendant No.2 for business purpose. Both the loan facilities were chargeable at different rates of interest. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards debt on 11.04.2014 and 25.11.2014. On 29.02.2016, a sum of ₹65,67,928/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, the suit.

¶19

3. The Civil Court sent summonses to the defendants by registered
post, which was duly served. After transfer, the Tribunal sent summonses
to the defendants, which were duly served. However, they did not put in appearance and were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of MD. Shahab Akhtar, Branch Manager, along with the
original loan and security documents.
5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered
view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced total loan of
₹50.00 Lacs (₹40.00 Lacs in C.C. Limit and ₹10.00 Lacs in Term Loan)
and on 29.02.2016, a sum of ₹65,67,928/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the case of the bank for the recovery of ₹65,67,928/-
(Rupees Sixty Five Lacs Sixty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty
Eight Only) with interest @12.65% per annum with monthly rests from
04.03.2016, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The
liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can
recover its dues by the sale of the personal movable and immovable
property(ies) of the defendants.

¶20

¶21

7.		Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8.		Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9.		Parties are directed to appear before	Recovery Officer on
13.07	.	2026.
10.		A Copy of this order along with Recovery	Certificate be sent to
the R	e	covery Officer as well as the parties.
Pron Dated MANOJ KALR	o : A	unced in the open court. 10.06.2026	(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. M/S Nikha Ornaments

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Nikha Ornaments

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 Sri Krishnappa

M S Pace Marketing Solutions Private Limited versus Bank of Maharashtra

Raja J versus Smfg India Home Finance Company Limited

Smt Sulukshna Tandon versus Central Bank of India

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Ganaie Traders

Pawan Kumar Sahu versus PNB Housing Finance Ltd.