CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA vs SMT DIVYA VERMA on 30 April 2025

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 12.05.2018 through Shri Rakesh Sharma, Chief Manager/ Principal Officer/ Constituted Aftorney ofthe applicant ban( under Section 19 ofthe RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,68,93,327.53 together with cost, charges and pendentellite and future interest @14'70olo from date of flling of this O.A. till the realization in full'

2. The brief facts of the case are that the request of defendants, the applicant bank sanctioned Overdraft Limit Facility of Rs.1.50 crores against equitable mortgage of immovable property i.e. Built Up Property bearing Plot No. 343, in Block No. C-3, situated in the layout plan of Yamuna Vihar, Ilaqa Shahdara, Delhi- 110053, admeasuring 68.75 sq. mts. The defendants Q\ Ms. Seema Gupta, Counsel appears for applicant bank. Defendants are exparte since 07.02.2023'

TA NO. 22312023 2 executed all necessary loaning documents dated L4.08.20t4. The defendant no.2 had executed his personal and continuing guarantee in favour of the applicant bank on 14.08.2014' The defendant no.1 had availed the aforesaid overdraft limit of Rs. 1.50 crores from the applicant bank and was required to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank. However, the defendant nos. 1 & 2 as borrower and guarantor has acknowledged the outstanding debt of the applicant bank by having executed letter of acknowledgement of debt dated 24.07.2017' The defendant no,1 had executed revelant renewal documents in favour of the applicant bank in consideration of having availed Overdraft limit of Rs. 1.50 Crores on 29.07 .2017 .

3. It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facility, but failed to maintain the financial discipline and failed to repay the due amounts. The applicant bank requested the defendants to regularize the loan ac@unt by visits and letters, but there was no response from the defendants, hence the account was classified as NPA on 26.11.2017. Therefore, the applicant bank served a demand notice dated 2g.Ll.21l7 to the defendants but failed to recover the same Thus, the present O'MIA is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues'

4. On notice by this Tribunal, the defendants failed to put appearance at all, despite publication' Accordingly, all the defendants were proceeded against expafte on 07.02.2023.5

.-- TA NO. 22312023 3

5. The applicant bank has filed the documents along with the OA as Paper no.1 to Paper no. 193 which have gone unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, the case of the applicant bank stands fully established against the defendants with respect to non-payment of EMI/ outstanding amount.

6. After perusing the records, this Tribunal is of the view that the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts. The documents filed by the applicant bank not rebutted by the defendants by not placing any evidence and there is no question of disbelieving the documents filed by the applicant bank based upon the written/printed documents. In the light of the above discussions, the present TA deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

1) I hereby allow this T.A. of the Applicant Bank and direct the defendant nos. 1 & 2 to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs.1,68,93,327.53 along with cost, expenses and interest @ 13.25olo from the date of filing of this O.A which has become TA till the date of realization.

2) In case of failure to deposit the above amount within the stipulated period, the same shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged property bearing Plot No. 343, in Block No. C-3, situated in the layout plan of Yamuna Vihar, Illaqa Shahdara, Delhi-l10053, admeasuring 68.75 sq. mts. In case of short fall, the same shall be recovered.frqthe sale of the personal c^

!!tEa. TA NO. 223t2023 4 movable and immovable assets of the defendant nos. 1 & 2.

3) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi.

4) The registry of this Tribunal is hereby directed to issue free copy of the order and send the same to both the parties.

5) Parties are direct to appear before the Ld. Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhion 30.06.2025. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to records. E-\ Date: 30.04.2025 (susH rL r0unn -nasroct) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi This judgement has been signed, pronounced in open court. dated and e) ,l\ (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi Date :30.04.2025 T