Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S A.R. Tiles

DRT7 Aug 2026TA/53/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for the recovery of ₹32,89,708.01 along with interest due from 01.08.2020. The court, proceeding ex parte against the non-appearance of the respondent, verified the loan and security documents and ordered the issuance of a Recovery Certificate for recovery from hypothecated and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹32,89,708.01 with interest at 12% p.a. from 01.08.2020 allowed; Recovery Certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus M/S A.R. Tiles — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

TA No: 53 of 2022 Date of Institution: 25.08.2020 Date of Decision: 10.08.2026

¶4

Canara Bank at Gandhi Nagar, Jammu.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs. M/s A.R. Tiles through its proprietor Sh. Abdul Rahim s/o Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Chowdhary r/o Village Lower Birpur, Purmandal Road, Near Data Talab, Tehsil Bari Brahmana, District Samba.

¶6

……….Defendant

¶7

Advocates

¶8

Sh. Sumit Batra, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant - ex parte .

¶9

TA for the Recovery of ₹32,89,708.01p with interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 25.08.2020.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

On 25.08.2020, Canara Bank, filed the suit for the recovery of ₹32,89,708.01p with interest against M/s A.R. Tiles (defendant) in the District Court, Jammu. However, vide order dated 20.09.2022, this suit was transferred by the Court of Additional District Judge, (Bank Cases), Srinagar, to DRT-I, Chandigarh.

¶12

Bank’s case is that on 01.06.2018, it had granted a loan of ₹30.00Lacs to defendant through its proprietor in the form of O.C.C. Limit for business purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had hypothecated assets (Fully detailed in Annexure P-3). The loan was chargeable to interest @12% per annum with monthly rests. On 01.08.2020, a sum of ₹32,89,708.01p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, the suit.

¶13

¶14

The Civil Court sent summons to the defendant which was duly served. After receiving the file by transfer from Jammu, this Tribunal sent summons to the defendant by registered post on 21.11.2023, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance and vide order dated 17.09.2025, the defendant was proceeded ex parte .

¶15

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Jatinder Kumar, Branch Manager, along with the 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 the loan of ₹30.00Lacs and on 01.08.2020, a sum of ₹32,89,708.01p was due. 6. Accordingly, the case of the bank for the recovery of ₹32,89,708.01p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Eight and One Paise Only) with interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 25.08.2020, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated assets (fully detailed in Annexure P-3) and the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 11.09.2026. 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 10.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. M/S A.R. Tiles

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S A.R. Tiles

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

Hdfc Bank versus Kulavindar Singh

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Khazin Rafi

Sh. Shyam Lal versus Punjab National Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Asadul Mondal

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Karwar Motors

State Bank of India versus Ms Garg Dall and Besan Mills and Ors.