BANK OF BARODA vs GARIMA JAIN on 7 February 2026

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-III, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi on 15.03.2022 under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.57,47,878.86 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Forty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Eight & paisa Eighty Six only) as on 28.02.2022 along with interest @13.55% per annum with quarterly rests plus @2% penal interest in Cash Credit account, @7.50% in BGECL S4'- account and @12.90% in FITL account from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization with costs. Further, the name of Shri Mithilesh Kumar was substituted in place of Sh.Pankaj Kumar as authorized representative for the applicant bank.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant as proprietress of M/s Mahavir Traders vide loan application, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility for Rs.25.00 lacs on 18.072018 for business purpose which was enhanced to Rs.45.00 lacs @13.55% interest on 19.10.2019 against hypothecation of stock of raw materials, work in process and finished goods etc. covered under CGTMSE scheme. In addition, the applicant sanctioned BGECL limit of Rs.9.00 lacs @7.50% interest repayable in 48 EMIs as per RBI guidelines on account of pandemic Covid-19 on 12.08.2020. The applicant bank converted overdue interest in Cash Credit into FITL of Rs.2.90 lacs for smooth running of business.

3. That in order to avail the credit facilities, the defendants as proprietress submitted loan application and executed Letter of Sole Proprietorship (LDOC-38), D.P. Note, Letter of Continuity, Letter of Undertaking — Book Debts, Composite Hypothecation Agreement (LDOC-17B), Power of Attorney (LDOC-86), Draft Undertaking, Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement, Undertaking in favour of applicant bank on 18.07.2018, 21.10.2019 and 12.08.2020.

4. It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to route their transactions through the account and deposit overdue interest/installments in the account to regularize the accounts despite repeated follow up. The applicant bank classified the accounts as NPA on 30.04.2021 as per RBI guidelines but defendants neglected, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

5. Notice under section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 05.08.2021 was issued to the defendant calling upon them to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank.

6. Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite of proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 01.02.2024, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

7. The defendant executed Acknowledgement of Debts and Liability on 21.10.2019 towards applicant bank.

8. In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Pankaj Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Power of Attorney, Sanction Letters, Sole Proprietorship Letter, Demand Promissory Notes, Letters of Continuity, Composite Hypothecation Agreements, LDOC 51, Power of Attorney of Book Debts, Statement of Account, Undertaking, Conversion of interest in to FITL Letter, Acknowledgement of Debt, Recall Notice & Postal. Receipts marked as AW-1 to AW-24.

9. 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.

10. 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.

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

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.57,47,878.86 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Forty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Eight & paisa Eighty Six only) along with interest @13.55% per annum with quarterly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stocks and machinery. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendant. (II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi. (III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 08.04.2026. s-d

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost. -2.._ (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI (Dictated and pronounced in open court) Date: 07.02.2026