Allowed

Canara Bank ( Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) v. M/S. G Square Craft

DRT18 Jun 2026TA/369/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an application filed by Canara Bank under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 for recovery of Rs. 27,56,027.32 along with interest and costs from the defendants. The Tribunal allowed the application, directing the defendants to pay the amount within 30 days and order recovery from hypothecated assets in case of default.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay Rs. 27,56,027.32 with interest and costs within 30 days, with provision for recovery from assets upon default.

Canara Bank ( Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) versus M/S. G Square… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Before SUSHIL KUMAR^{RASTOGI, Presiding} Officer

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il,^Delhi

¶3

TA No,369 OF 2022

¶4

CANARA BANK^{(SYNDTCATEBANK) VS MR. G} SQUARE CRAFT & ORS

¶5

Reserued on : 15.05.2026

¶6

Pronounced on :^18.O6.2026

Canara Bank

(Syndicate Bank)

-Applicant bank

Vs.

MR. G Square Craft

¶12

Mr. Niraj Kumar^GuPta

¶13

Mrs. Anjali Sharma

¶14

Mrs. Gayatri GuPta - Defendants

¶15

Present: Shri. Hitesh Chopra,^{Counsel appearsfor} applicant bank. Defendant nos.1,2, and 4 are^exPafte, since, 19.09.2023. Defendant no.3^is exparte^{since t2.06.2024.}

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application^{has been filed by the} applicant bank, on^{28.11.2019through Sh. Asish} Kumar Maiti, Chief^{Manager of the applicant bank,} under section^{19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the} defendants for^{recovery of a sum of Rs.27 ,56,027} '32 together with cost,^{charges and pendentelliteand} future interest @10.95olo^{from date of filing of this O'A'} till the realization^{in full.}

¶18

The brief^{facts of the case are that at the request} of defendant^{no.1 throughits partners, the applicant} bank sanctioned^{a soD(H)Facilityof Rs.25,00,0001-,} vide sanction letter^{dated 08.01.2016. The defendant} nos.2 to 4 are the^{patnQrs of defendant no.1 firm. The}

.So\ I

TA NO. 369 of 2022

said SOD(H) Facility^{was primarily securedby} hypothecation of^{book debt in trade. The defendants} have executed all^{necessary loaning documents on} 16.0r.2016.

¶23

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^{applicantbank requested the} defendants to^{regularize the loan account by visits and} letters, but there^{was no response from the} defendants,^{hence the account was classifiedas NPA} on 27.L1.2018.^{The applicant bank serued a legal} notice dated^{27.06.2019to the defendants but failed to} recover the same.^{Thus, the present O.A'|I'A'is} preferred by the applicant^{bank to recover its dues.}

¶24

On notice^{by this Tribunal, defendantnos'1, 2 &} 4 failed to^put appearance^{at all, despitepublication,} Accordingly, the^{defendantnos.l, 2 & 4 were} proceeded against exparte^{on 19.09.2023.The} defendant no.3^{put appearancethroughcounsel and} filed written statement^{but failed to file evidence'} Thereafter, the^{defendantno.3 failed toput} appearance^{in the matter. Accordingly,the defendant} no.3 was^{proceeded against expafte on 12.06 .2024.}

¶25

The applicant^{bank has filed evidenceby way pf} affidavit of sh.^{Asish KumarMaiti, chief Managerof the} appticant bank^{as AnnexureA-1 to Annexure A-18,} which have^{gone unchallengedand un-rebutted.} Hence, the^{case of the applicant stands fully} established against^{the defendants with respect to} nonpayment of^{outstaqdiqg amount'}

TA NO. 369 of2022

After^perusing the^{records, this Tribunalis of the} view that the applicant^{bank has provedits case} beyond reasonable^{doubts.The evidenceand} documents filed by the^{applicant banknot rebuttedby} the defendants by not^{placing any evidenceand there} is no question of disbelieving^{the evidenceand} documents flled by the^{applicant bank based upon the} written/printed documents.

¶30

In the light of the above discussions,^{the present T.A.} deseryes to be allowed.

¶31

ORDER

¶32

I hereby allow this^{T.A. of the applicant bank and} direct the defendant nos.l to^{4 to pay jointlyand} severally to the applicant bank^{within 30 days from} today, a sum of Rs.27,56,027.32 along^{with cost,} expenses and interest @9.70olo^{from the date of filing} of this O.A. which has^{become T.A till the date of} realization.

¶33

In case of failure to deposit^{the above amount} within the stipulated^period, the^{same shall be} recovered from the sale of^{hypothecatedassets. In case} of short fall, the same^{shall be recovered from the sale} of personal movable and^{immovable assets of the} defendant nos.l to^4.

¶34

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

¶35

The registry of^{this Tribunal is hereby directed to} issue free copy of the order^{and send the same to both} the parties. -rftr-

¶36

¶37

TA NO. 369 of 2022 4 5) Parties are directed to appear^{before the Ld.} Recovery Officer, DRT-II,^{Delhi on 18.08 .2026.Pending} IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶38

File be consigned to^records. s)

¶39

Date : 18.06.2026^{(SUSHIL KUtqnxKA>lubr)} PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi This^judgement has^been signed, dated and pronounced in open court.

¶40

¶41

Date : 18.06.2026 (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Canara Bank ( Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) v. M/S. G Square Craft

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank ( Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) v. M/S. G Square Craft

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