Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Shine Plastic Industry and Ors.

DRT27 Jul 2026TA/368/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of debt totaling Rs.31,21,236/- plus interest and costs against absent defendants who failed to appear or file a written statement.

What did the court decide?

Directed the defendants to pay Rs.31,21,236/- with pendentelite and future interest @13.65% p.a. and costs within 30 days; directed issuance of recovery certificate.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Shine Plastic Industry… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No. 368 of 2023

¶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.368 of 2023

¶5

Bank of Baroda

¶6

SME Branch, B-1A/12, Sector-51, Noida, UP Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Shine Impex Industry B-24/F-2, Dilshad Garden, Delhi-110095

¶9

Also at:

¶10

28/3-B, Dilshad Garden Industrial Area Dilshad Garden, Delhi-110095

¶11

Sh.Rajeev Goel Partner - M/s Shine Impex Industry 28/3-B, Dilshad Garden Industrial Area Dilshad Garden, Delhi-110095

¶12

Also at:

¶13

Sh.Rajeev Goel D-115, Anand Vihar, Delhi-110092

¶14

Sh.Radhey Shyarn Goel Partner - M/s M/s Shine Impex Industry 28/3-B, Dilshad Garden Industrial Area Dilshad Garden, Delhi-110095

¶15

Also at:

¶16

Sh.Radhey Shyam Goel D-115, Anand Vihar, Delhi-110092 Defendants

¶17

Present: Shri Abhishek Raina, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶18

Date of Reserve: 02.07.2026

¶19

Date of Pronouncement: 27.07.2026

T.A. No. 368 of 2023

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 26.12.2019 through Sh.D.N.Chandra, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.31,21,236/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Twenty One Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Six only) as on 31.10.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @11.65% per annum with monthly rests and penal interest @2% from 01.11.2019 till the date of its realization and costs.

¶24

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 being partnership concern of defendant no.2 and 3 as partners/guarantors, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit Hypothecation facility of Rs.22.00 lacs (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs only) for working capital @11.15% interest per annum with monthly rests and Term Loan of Rs.2,90,000/(Rupees Two Lacs Ninety Thousand only) @11.65% interest per annum with monthly rests on 31.01.2017 and penal interest @2% monthly compounding against hypothecation of stocks, book debts, packing materials, stores & spares, current & fixed assets and plant & machinery purchased out of term loan of defendant no.1 covered under CGTMSE scheme. The term loan was to be repaid in 24 EMIs of Rs.12,083.33 plus interest.

¶25

That in order to avail the credit facilities, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Agreement of Hypothecation, Power of Attorney, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuity, Letters of Guarantee, Letter of

¶26

T.A. No. 368 of 2023

¶27

Confirmation of Guarantee, Letter of General Lien and Set-Off from Guarantors, Declaration and Consent Clause on 31.03.2017 in favour of applicant bank.

¶28

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid credit facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and deposit the installments and interest in the account. The applicant bank classified the accounts as NPA on 31.05.2018 as per RBI guidelines and issued legal notice dated 09.10.2019 thereby recalled the credit facilities but the defendants neglected the notice, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶29

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 10.12.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶30

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Deena Nath, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has exhibited the documents such as Board Resolution dated 14.11.2017, Sanction Letter, Agreement of Hypothecation, Power of Attorney, General Undertaking, Specific Undertaking, Demand Promissory Note, Letters of Continuity, Letters of Guarantee, Letter of Confirmation of Guarantee, Letter of General Lien & Set Off, Declaration in respect of Pending Court Cases and Consent Clause, Legal Notice and Postal Receipts, Statement of Account, Interest Calculation Sheet along with Certificate of

¶31

¶32

T.A. No. 368 of 2023

¶33

Outstanding and Certificate u/s 2 of Bankers' Book of Evidence Act 1891 read with Section 65(B) (4) of Indian Evidence Act 1872 marked as Exhibit A-1 to A-10(Colly).

¶34

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 approved.

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

ORDER

¶38

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.31,21,236/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Twenty One Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Six only) as on 31.10.2019 together with pendentelite and future interest @13.65% per annum with monthly rests from 01.11.2019 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated stocks, current assets, book debts and plant & machinery etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants. sci_

¶39

T.A. No. 368 of 2023

¶40

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

¶41

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 25.09.2026.

¶42

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

¶43

5C/ '71'34 -

¶44

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

¶45

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 27.07.2026

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Shine Plastic Industry and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Shine Plastic Industry and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yes Bank versus Mr Dinesh Damodhar Marsattiwar

Hdfc Bank versus Kaushalya Chandel

Sri Sisir Sen And Anr. versus Idbi Bank

Canara Bank versus Anjali Plastic

Indusind Bank Limited versus Oplos Medicare Pharmaceuticals Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Nng Import Export Pvt. Ltd.