Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
YES BANK vs MS PARTH GRAPHIC AND ORS on 6 June 2026
Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi
4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building,
Parliament Street, New Delhi
Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma
T.A. No. 1018 of 2023
Yes Bank Ltd.
G-81, Preet Vihar,
Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092
Versus
1.
M/s Paarth Graphics
Through Proprietor Sh.Navneet Gulati
B-27, DSIDC Complex, Near Shandara Flyover, Jhilmil Industrial Area, Delhi-110095
2. Sh.Navneet Gulati s/o Mohan Lal Gulati R/o D-23, Karkardooma Court, Shandara, Delhi-110032
3. Ms Sarika Gulati c/o Mohan Lal Gulati R/o D-23, Karkardooma Court, Shandara, Delhi-110032
Applicant
Defendants
Present: Ms Sonia Rawat, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Reserve: 20.05.2026
Date of Pronouncement: 06.06.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
FINAL ORDER
This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 11.03.2022 before DRT II Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 read with Rule 8 of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.77,50,414/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Lacs Fifty sd-
Thousand Four Hundred Fourteen only) as on 28.01.2022 together with pendentelite and future interest @12.65% with monthly rests from 28.01.2022 till the date of its realization along with costs.
2. The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendants vide loan application, the applicant bank sanctioned Overdraft facility for working capital for a sum of Rs.46,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Six Lacs only) on 03.06.2017 @12.00% rate of interest which was enhanced to Rs.66,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Six Lacs only) on 15.05.2018 @12.65% interest per annum against exclusive charge of hypothecation of current assets and movable fixed assets covered under CGTMSE scheme. The applicant bank reviewed the limit from time to time lastly on 15.06.2020 for Rs.66.00 lacs till 20.09.2020. The defendants also availed ECGL facility but defaulted in repayment.
3. That in order to avail the loan facilities, the defendants submitted Loan Application Form and executed Facility Agreement, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuity of Demand Promissory Note, Deed of Hypothecation, Letter of Guarantee, Facility Renewal Letters on 03.06.2017 and thereafter at the time of renewal of limits in favour of the applicant bank.
4. It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions and failed to adhere to the terms and conditions of sanction either towards principle or interest despite several requests of the Applicant Bank. The applicant bank issued loan recall notice dated 07.01.2022 calling the outstanding amount but defendants failed to regularize the account. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues.
5. 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 17.10.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.
6. In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Ashish Ranjan, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Power of Attorney, Master Facility Agreement, Demand Promissory. Note, Letter of Continuity, Deed of Hypothecation, Letter of Guarantee, Renewal Letters, Recall Notice, Statement of Account marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/6.
7. 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 proved.
8. 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.
9. In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.
ORDER
I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within 30 days, a sum of Rs.77,50,414/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Lacs Fifty Thousand Four Hundred Fourteen only) as on 28.01.2022 together with pendentelite and future interest @12.65% per annum from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization along with costs, failing which the amount shall be recovered from hypothecated current assets and book debts etc. In case of default, the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable property of the defendants. (II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi. (III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 05.08.2026. (IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost. c .54
, 26, (GOVIND BALLABH-SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI (Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 06.06.2026