NATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED vs WEST HARYANA HIGHWAYS PROJECTS PVT LTD AND ORS on 5 February 2026

**FINAL ORDER**

1. 1. This original application was filed by the Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5 on 22.02.2019, through Mr. Sunil Kumar Tandon, Chief Manager of the applicant no. 1 bank / Punjab National Bank (PNB); Ms. Neha Sharma, Manager of applicant no. 2 / IIFCL; Mr. Ashok Singla, AGM of applicant no. 3 bank / Central Bank of India (CBI); Mr. Sanjay Rai, AGM of applicant no. 5 bank / State Bank of India (SBI) (eSBP) and Mr. Anuj Kumar, Chief Manager of applicant no. 5 bank / Dena Bank being Authorized Officer(s) of Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5, under Section 19 of the Recovery 

of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the Defendants no. 1 to 3 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 692,15,55,489.69 (Rupees Six Hundred Ninety Two Crore Fifteen Lakh Fifty Five Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Sixty Nine only) in following manner:-

<thead> <tr> <th><b>Applicant Nos.<br/>&amp; Facility<br/>Name</b></th> <th><b>Qua<br/>Defendants<br/>no.</b></th> <th><b>Amount due</b></th> <th><b>With<br/>Interest<br/>@</b></th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td colspan="4"><b><u>Applicant no. 1</u></b></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 177,30,74,917.00</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional<br/>Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 63,82,15,131.00</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 9,54,41,871.00</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4">Claim of Applicant no. 1 qua Defendant no. 3 is restricted only for Rs. 63,82,15,131.00 payable towards Additional Rupee Loan for which the defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.</td> </tr> <tr>

</tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan 1</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 108,85,70,456.17</td> <td>12.30%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 12,30,91,490.97</td> <td>12.30%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4"><b><u>Applicant no. 3</u></b></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 143,54,50,906.00</td> <td>12.85%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional<br/>Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 10,21,75,029.00</td> <td>12.85%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 16,43,24,560.50</td> <td>12.85%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4">Claim of Applicant no. 3 qua Defendant no. 3 is restricted only for Rs. 10,21,75,029.00 payable towards Additional Rupee Loan for</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

<thead> <tr> <th colspan="4">which the defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td colspan="4"><b><u>Applicant no. 4</u></b></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 65,34,73,031.04</td> <td>12.30%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 3,93,21,624.66</td> <td>12.30%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 6,96,44,269.59</td> <td>12.30%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4">Claim of Applicant no. 4 qua Defendant no. 3 is restricted only for Rs. 3,93,21,624.66 payable towards Additional Rupee Loan for which the defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.</td> </tr> <tr>

</tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 63,21,08,305.76</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional Rupee Loan</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 2,57,14,301.00</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>D-1 &amp; 2</td> <td>Rs. 8,09,49,596.00</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="4">Claim of Applicant no. 5 qua Defendant no. 3 is restricted only for Rs. 2,57,14,301.00 payable towards Additional Rupee Loan for which the defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

together with interest (as mentioned above) from the date of filing of OA till the date of actual and final realization with all costs, charges, expenses etc. along with other relief(s).

1.2 It is pertinent to note here that this OA bearing no. 261/2019 was originally filed before Ld. DRT-II, Delhi, however, in pursuance to Gazette Notification No. 4718 (E) dated 04.10.2022 issued by Government of India, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, this case file was transferred by Ld. DRT-II, Delhi to this Tribunal in November 2022 and was numbered at TA-472/2022.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant no. 1 Bank is a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970. It is also stated that the present OA is signed, verified and instituted on behalf of Applicant no. 1 Bank by Sh. Sunil Kumar Tandon, Chief Manager of Applicant Bank is a Principal officer and as such can sign, verify and institute the present OA. It is further stated that Sh. Sunil Kumar Tandon, being also the duly constituted attorney of applicant bank and in that capacity also he is competent to sign, verify and institute the OA.

Applicant no. 2 is a company constituted under Companies Act, 1956 which is a wholly owned Government of India Company set up in 2006 to provide long term financial assistance to viable infrastructure projects through a special purpose vehicle called the Indian Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd., broadly referred to as SIFTL. Vide Notification dated 14.01.2009 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and published in the Gazette of India, in exercise of power conferred by sub-section (2) of section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956, the Central Government notified the Applicant no. 2 as a Public Financial Institution. It is also stated that the present OA is signed, verified and instituted on behalf of Applicant no. 2 by Ms. Neha Sharma, Manager of Applicant no. 2. Ms. Neha Sharma is a Principal officer and as such can sign, verify and institute the present OA. It is further stated that Ms. Neha Sharma, being also the duly constituted attorney of applicant no. 2 and in that capacity also she is competent to sign, verify and institute the OA.

Further, Applicant no. 3 is a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of 

Undertaking) Act, 1970. It is also stated that the present OA is signed, verified and instituted on behalf of Applicant no. 3 Bank by Sh. Ashok Singla, Assistant General Manager of Applicant no. 3 Bank who is a Principal officer and as such can sign, verify and institute the present OA. It is further stated that Sh. Singla, being also the duly constituted attorney of applicant no. 3 bank and in that capacity also he is competent to sign, verify and institute the OA.

Applicant no. 4 Bank is the erstwhile State Bank of Patiala, which now stands acquired by and stands amalgamated with State Bank of India ("SBI"), w.e.f. 01.04.2017 as per GSR 156 (E) dated 22.02.2017 issued by Ministry of Finance, Government of India, whereby all the assets, liabilities and loans etc. of the erstwhile State Bank of Patiala were transferred to and acquired by SBI. SBI is a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act 1955. It is also stated that the present OA is signed, verified and instituted on behalf of Applicant no. 4 Bank by Sh. Sanjay Rai, Assistant General Manager of Applicant no. 4 Bank who is a Principal officer and as such can sign, verify and institute the present OA. It is further stated that Sh. Rai, being also the duly constituted attorney of applicant no. 4 bank and in that capacity also he is competent to sign, verify and institute the OA.

Further, Applicant no. 5 Bank is a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970. It is also stated that the present OA is signed, verified and instituted on behalf of Applicant no. 5 Bank by Sh. Anuj Kumar, Chief Manager of Applicant no. 5 Bank who is a Principal officer and as such can sign, verify and institute the present OA. It is further stated that Sh. Anuj 

Kumar, being also the duly constituted attorney of applicant no. 5 bank and in that capacity also he is competent to sign, verify and institute the OA.

2.1 It is stated in the OA that Defendant no. 1 is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and it can be sued in its own name.

Defendant no. 2 is a Managing Director of Defendant no. 1 and he also stood as guarantor in his personal capacity for the facility granted to and in the name of Defendant no. 1.

Defendant no. 3 also stood as guarantor in his personal capacity for the facility granted to and in the name of Defendant no. 1 and he is impleaded in that capacity.

Defendant no. 4 is a private limited company constituted under the Companies Act, 1956 which stood as corporate guarantor and has also pledged the shares held by it in the Defendant no. 1 and as such the Defendant no. 4 is impleaded in the capacity of corporate guarantor as well as pledger of shares. However, no relief has been claimed against Defendant no. 4, since it is under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Defendant no. 5 is a security trustee holding and having possession of all the security documents. As per the engagement, the securities were created in favour of Defendant no. 5 who has been appointed and acting as security trustee, on behalf of the Applicants. It is stated in the OA that Defendant no. 5 has been impleaded only as proforma defendant and no relief has been claimed against the Defendant no. 5. It is also stated that the Defendant no. 5

remains under obligation to produce all the original documents in its possession before this Hon'ble Tribunal as and when required.

2.2 It is further stated in the OA that the Defendant no. 1 approached and requested the Applicants to grant senior Rupee Loan to the extent of Rs. 410.23 crore in Consortium. The Applicants considered the request of Defendant no. 1 and sanctioned and granted the loan facility as detailed hereinbelow:-

<thead> <tr> <th>Name of the Bank</th> <th>Sanctioned amount (in Rs. Crore)</th> <th>Allotted amount (in Rs. Crore)</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Punjab National Bank</td> <td>150.00</td> <td>133.23</td> </tr> <tr> <td>IIFCL</td> <td>115.00</td> <td>101.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Central Bank of India</td> <td>100.00</td> <td>88.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>State Bank of India (eSBP)</td> <td>50.00</td> <td>44.00<br/>(Rs. 24.30 crore<br/>Bank Guarantee<br/>within TL Limit)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Dena Bank</td> <td>50.00</td> <td>44.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td><b>Total</b></td> <td><b>465.00</b></td> <td><b>410.23</b></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

It the stated in the OA that the above limits sanctioned by the Consortium Lenders were duly accepted by the Defendant no. 1, by way of its Board Resolution dated 02.05.2008 and Mr. J.L. Khushu was authorized to convey the approval of the broad terms and conditions stipulated in the respective sanction letters of the Applicants. Sh. J.L. Khushu and Sh. Adarsh Sharan, Directors severally authorized to approve and execute the requisite loan / Finance documents and to create security and execute security documents in this regard, on behalf of the Defendant no. 1.

In consideration of sanctioning and granting the above mentioned loans to and in the name of defendant no. 1, and in pursuance of the above mentioned Board Resolution passed by the Defendant no. 1, Sh. J.L. Khushu being the Director and authorized person on behalf of defendant no. 1 executed the following documents:-

<thead> <tr> <th>Facility</th> <th>Limit<br/>(In Rs.<br/>Crore)</th> <th>Rate of<br/>Interest</th> <th>Document</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Rupee Term<br/>Loan</td> <td>410.23</td> <td>11.50%<br/>with<br/>monthly<br/>rests</td> <td>(i) Common Loan<br/>Agreement dated<br/>02.05.2008<br/><br/>(ii) Joint Deed of<br/>Hypotheccation<br/>dated 02.05.2008<br/>in favour of IL&amp;FS<br/>Trust Company<br/>Pvt. Ltd. being the<br/>"Security Trustee"<br/><br/>(iii) Escrow Agreement<br/>dated 29.09.2008</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

It is stated in the OA that the Defendant no. 1 was under obligation to repay the loans to each of the Applicants as per the repayment schedule set out in Schedule III of Common Loan Agreement. The entire loan was to be repaid within span of 12-years after memorandum period of 40 months from the date of first disbursement. The loans were agreed to be repaid in structured 48 unequal quarterly instalments, commencing from 16 months after Commercial Operation Date (COD) i.e. 31.03.2010.

It is further stated that interest upto COD was to be capitalized and paid out of the sources of funding of the Project and thereafter was to be paid out of the Project cash flows till the repayment of the entire Rupee Loans. The effective rate of interest was agreed @11.50% p.a. with monthly rests as detailed in Schedule-II of the Common Loan Agreement (CLA). Moreover, as per Clause 2.6.1 of CLA, in the event of default as stated therein, the Defendant no. 1 in addition to the stipulated interest was further liable to pay default interest @1% on the defaulted amounts.

It is also stated in the OA that an Inter-se Agreement dated 02.05.2008 was executed amongst the Lenders whereby the Applicant no. 1 Bank was appointed and accepted by all the lenders to act as the "Lead Bank" and to act and do all such acts / jobs as defined and detailed in the said Inter-se Agreement on behalf of the consortium members.

It is further stated in the OA that besides creating security by way of hypothecation over all its movable and receivables as detailed in the Joint Deed of Hypothecation, the Defendant no. 1 also offered the personal guarantee of Defendant no. 2. Accordingly, defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor in his personal capacity and executed and delivered Agreement of Guarantee dated 02.05.2008, thereby making himself personally liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from the Defendant no. 1 to the Applicants. The said guarantee is a continuing one.

It is stated in the OA that it was one of the conditions of the sanctions that the Defendant no. 4 / Era Infra Engineering Ltd. will pledge the shares held by it in defendant no. 1 as further security for the facility granted to the defendant no. 1. The Board of Directors of Defendant no. 4 vide its resolution dated 02.05.2008 approved to pledge the shares. Accordingly, in furtherance of the condition in the sanction and in pursuance of the board resolution dated 06.10.2008, a Deed of Pledge dated 07.10.2008 was executed on behalf of Defendant no. 4 in favour of IL&FS, the Security Agent, thereby creating the pledge in favour of the Applicants. The defendant no. 4 vide its Deed of Pledge, pledged 51% of the issued and paid up shares of the defendant no. 1. The Security Trustee holds the said pledge for and on behalf of the Lenders. The details of the pledges shares are as under:-

<thead> <tr> <th>Name of the Shareholder</th> <th>No. of Shares Pledged</th> <th>Face Value</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Era Infra Engineering Limited</td> <td>12495</td> <td>Rs. 10/-</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Since, the Defendant no. 4 is under CIR process, the Applicants do not seek enforcement of guarantee executed by defendant no. 4 and the security created by Defendant no. 4.

2.3 It is stated in the OA that in order to incorporate certain changes required by the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) in the Common Loan Agreement, a Supplementary Common Loan Agreement was executed between the Defendant no. 1 and the Lenders on 29.09.2008.

2.4 It is also stated in the OA that due to certain delays in implementing the Project, the COD as agreed upon, could not be achieved and hence, it was agreed COD be extended from 01.05.2010 to 01.05.2014. Further, due to delay in implementation of the project resulting in extension of COD, the implementation cost of project had also increased. In view of the same, the Defendant no. 1 approached the Applicants for re-phasing of repayment schedule and sanction of Funded Interest Term Loan (FITL) for interest amount for 10- months i.e. from 01.07.2013 to 30.04.2014, amounting to Rs. 44.42 crore for the entire consortium. Besides the FITL, the defendant no. 1 also requested the Applicants for a Additional Rupee Loan to the tune of Rs. 25.0 crore to meet partially the cost overrun.

The Applicants considered the request of Defendant no. 1 and sanctioned the re-phasing of the repayment schedule, sanction of FITL to the extent of Rs. 44.42 crore and fresh loan of Rs. 18.84 crore. The Applicant no. 1 Bank sanctioned the above for its share on 29.11.2013 while the Applicants no. 3 to 5 could grant sanction for their respective share in FITL and Additional Rupee Loan besides agreeing for the rephasing only in the month of December 2013 and the Applicant no. 2 conveyed its sanction for rephasing and sanction of FITL on 26.02.2014. Applicant no. 2 did not sanction the Additional Rupee Loan.

2.5 The defendant no. 1 vide its resolution dated 29.11.2013 passed by its Board of Directors accepted the above sanction along with the broad terms and conditions conveyed by the Applicant no. 1 and Sh. Alok Khanna was authorized to execute the finance and security documents on behalf of Defendant no. 1 in favour of Applicant no. 1.

2.6 In consideration of the Defendant no. 1 having agreed for the rephasing of the repayment schedule and for sanctioning FITL to the extent of Rs. 14.43 crore as share of Applicant no. 1, the Defendant no. 1 executed a standalone Supplementary Term Loan Agreement and FITL Agreement, both dated 29.11.2013, in favour of the Applicant no. 1. However, the share of Applicant no. 1 in the Additional Rupee Loan was to be released only after full the up and joint documentation. The defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor and executed an Agreement of Guarantee dated 29.11.2013 thereby making himself personally liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from the Defendant no. 1 to Applicant no. 1. Further more, Applicant no. 1 also obtained the corporate guarantee of Defendant no. 4 and Defendant no. 4 executed an Agreement of Guarantee dated 29.11.2013 thereby making it liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from the Defendant no. 1 to Applicant no. 1. The said guarantee on behalf of Defendant no. 4 was executed by Sh. Alok Khanna, Chief Operating Officer, in pursuance of Resolution passed by Board of Director of Defendant no. 4 in the meeting held on 29.09.2013.

2.7 It is stated in the OA that after the sanctions from all the Applicants the position emerged as under:-

<thead> <tr> <th>Applicant Banks</th> <th>Date of Sanction</th> <th>Additional Rupee Loan (Rs. in Crore)</th> <th>FITL (Rs. in Crore)</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Punjab National Bank</td> <td>29.11.2013</td> <td>8.12</td> <td>14.43</td> </tr> <tr> <td>India Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd.</td> <td>26.02.2014 and 21.03.2014</td> <td>Nil</td> <td>10.93</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Central Bank of India</td> <td>31.12.2013</td> <td>5.36</td> <td>9.86</td> </tr> <tr> <td>State Bank of Patiala</td> <td>31.12.2013</td> <td>2.68</td> <td>4.76</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Dena Bank</td> <td>28.12.2013</td> <td>2.68</td> <td>4.77</td> </tr> <tr> <td><b>Total</b></td> <td></td> <td><b>18.84</b></td> <td><b>44.75</b></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

It is stated in the OA that Applicant no. 2 did not participate in sanctioning of Additional Rupee Loan.

2.8 It is further stated in the OA that the defendant no. 1 vide resolution dated 31.01.2014 passed in the meeting of its Board of Directors accepted the sanctions for additional term loan as per the share of lenders as mentioned hereinabove. Sh. Nikhil Jain be authorized signatory of Defendant no. 1 was authorized to convey the acceptance on behalf of defendant no. 1 and to execute the finance / security documents including creation / extension of security.

2.9 In consideration of sanctioned the additional term loan as mentioned hereinabove, on behalf of the Defendant no. 1 Sh. Nikhil Jain being duly authorized by Board of Directors executed following documents:-

<thead> <tr> <th>Facility</th> <th>Limit<br/>(In Rs.<br/>Crore)</th> <th>Rate of<br/>Interest</th> <th>Document</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Rupee Term<br/>Loan</td> <td>410.23</td> <td>13.50%<br/>with<br/>monthly<br/>rests</td> <td>(i) Second<br/>Supplementary<br/>Agreement to<br/>Common Loan<br/>Agreement dated<br/>31.01.2014</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional<br/>Rupee Loan</td> <td>18.84</td> <td></td> <td>(ii) Supplementary<br/>Joint Deed of<br/>Hypothecation<br/>dated 31.01.2014</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

It is stated in the OA that a Supplementary Inter Se Agreement dated 31.01.2014 was also executed amongst the Lenders and Defendant no. 1 whereby it was agreed that Applicant no. 1 shall continue to be lead lender / bank as per the terms and conditions contained therein. The defendant no. 1 was also a party to the said agreement.

Defendant no. 4 also executed a Supplementary Deed of Pledge dated 31.01.2014 thereby extending pledge over the shares held by it in Defendant no. 1. For the purpose, the board of directors of defendant no. 4 resolved to authorize Sh. Nikhil Jain, the authorized signatory of the company and Sh. Rajiv Kumar authorized signatory, severally to executed the Supplementary Deed of Pledge on behalf of the Defendant no. 4.

Further, the defendants no. 2 & 3 in consideration of granting additional term loan stood as guarantors in their personal capacity and executed and delivered separate Agreement of Guarantee both dated 31.01.2014 thereby making themselves personally liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from defendant no. 1 to the applicant banks. The said guarantee is continuing guarantee.

Moreover, Defendant no. 4 also offered the corporate guarantee for the additional term loan sanctioned and granted by the Applicants no. 1 and 3 to 5. For the purpose, the Board of Directors of Defendant no. 4 in its meeting held on 14.11.2013 approved that the company shall extend the corporate guarantee for Rs. 429.07 crore and also to extend the pledge for the additional term loan as well. The Board resolved to authorize Sh. Nikhil Jain the authorized signatory of the company and Sh. Rajiv Kumar the Company Secretary severally to execute the Corporate Guarantee on behalf of defendant no. 4. In consideration of granting Additional Senior Rupee Loan, as mentioned hereinabove, to and in the name of defendant no. 1, on behalf of defendant no. 4 and in pursuance to resolution dated 14.11.2013, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, the Company Secretary of defendant no. 4 executed the Agreement of Guarantee thereby making the defendant no. 4 liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from defendant no. 1 to the applicants. However, in view of 

the CIR process the applicants are not seeking to enforce the guarantee of defendant no. 4.

2.10 It is stated in the OA that the additional senior rupee loan was to be repaid in 10 quarterly instalments as detailed in Schedule IV Part B of Second Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement. The interest was agreed to be payable 13.50% p.a. with monthly rests as mentioned in Schedule III of Second Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement.

2.11 It is stated in the OA that to avail the FITL to the extent of Rs. 44.75 crore and additional rupee loan to the extent of Rs. 18.84 crore, the Board of Directors of Defendant no. 1 in its meeting held on 20.03.2014 accepted the abovementioned sanctions and authorized Sh. Nikhil Jain, the authorized signatory of company, to execute finance / security documents on behalf of Defendant no. 1 and in favour of the Applicants.

2.12 In consideration of granting the FITL and re-phasing of repayment schedule, on behalf of defendant no. 1, Sh. Nikhil Jain executed following documents:-

<thead> <tr> <th>Facility</th> <th>Limit<br/>(In Rs.<br/>Crore)</th> <th>Rate of<br/>Interest</th> <th>Document</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>44.75</td> <td>13.50%<br/>p.a.<br/>with<br/>monthly<br/>rests</td> <td>(i) Third<br/>Supplementary<br/>Agreement to<br/>Common Loan<br/>Agreement dated<br/>21.03.2014<br/><br/>(ii) Supplementary<br/>Joint Deed of<br/>Hypothecation<br/>dated 21.03.2014</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

It is stated in the OA that a Supplementary Inter Se Agreement dated 21.03.2014 was also executed amongst the Applicants and Defendant no. 1 whereby Applicant no. 1 continued as Lead Bank and the existing terms and conditions were reiterated.

In consideration of granting the FITL and the rephasing of the repayment schedule, the defendant no. 2 stood as guarantors and executed a Deed of Guarantee dated 21.03.2014 thereby making himself personally liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from defendant no. 1 to the Applicants. The said guarantee is continuing guarantee. The guarantee executed by Defendant no. 3 for additional rupee loan continues.

Moreover, Defendant no. 4 vide its Resolution dated 14.02.2014 resolved to execute a fresh Deed of Guarantee and to extend the pledge over shares held by it in Defendant no. 1 and for this purpose, authorized Sh. Nikhil Jain and /or Sh. Vikrant Dagar, the authorized signatories of Defendant no. 4 to execute the Corporate Guarantee and to extend the existing pledge over its shares in Defendant no. 1. In consideration of the aforesaid and in pursuance of the above mentioned resolution, Sh. Nikhil Jain executed Guarantee Agreement dated 21.03.2014 thereby making the defendant no. 4 liable for any amount which may be found due at any time from defendant no. 1 to the applicants. The said guarantee is also continuing one. Further, on behalf of the Defendant no. 4, Second Supplementary Deed of Pledge dated 21.03.2014 was executed by Sh. Nikhil Jain on behalf of Defendant no. 4.


2.13 It is stated in the OA that the FITL was to be repaid in 12 quarterly instalments as detailed in Part C of Schedule III of Third Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement. On rephasing of the repayment schedule of the existing Rupee Loan the repayment was to be made as per Part A of Schedule III of Third Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement. The interest was agreed to be payable 13.50% p.a. with monthly rests to be calculated as per Schedule II to the Third Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement.

2.14 It is further stated in the OA that all the securities were created in favour of and held by IL&FS Trust Company Limited, on behalf of all the Lenders. The charge of the applicants over the securities is to rank as pari passu amongst the Applicants. All the loans were released through the Escrow Account which was opened with the Applicant no. 1 and the repayment was also made in the said account.

2.15 It is stated in the OA that the Defendant no. 1 was under obligation to pay the monthly instalments for all three loans regularly and also was under obligation to pay the interest in all the accounts as and when became due. Besides the same, the Defendant no. 1 was also under obligation to submit the inventory of hypothecated goods and to route all its financial transactions through Escrow Account opened with the Applicant no. 1.

2.16 It is further stated in the OA that the Defendant no. 1 failed to pay the monthly instalments towards two Senior Rupee Loans and FITL regularly and also failed to pay the interest as and when it became due in the said accounts, as such the said accounts became irregular and overdue. Since, A small blue circular logo or stamp is positioned to the left of a solid green rectangular box. The logo appears to be a stylized letter 'A' or a similar symbol. The green box is a solid, opaque rectangle.

the defendants failed to regularize the accounts despite several requests made by the Applicants and as such the same was classified as NPA in the accounts of books of Accounts of the Applicant no. 1 on 30.06.2016; in the accounts of books of Accounts of the Applicant no. 2 on 31.03.2015; in the accounts of books of Accounts of the Applicant no. 3 on 01.05.2014; in the accounts of books of Accounts of the Applicant no. 4 on 29.06.2014 and in the accounts of books of Accounts of the Applicant no. 5 on 27.12.2013.

2.17 It is stated in the OA that in the books of Accounts of Applicant no. 1 on 30.06.2016, a sum of Rs. 124,46,07,000/- was outstanding towards Rupee Loan, a sum of Rs. 4,46,60,000/- was outstanding towards Additional Rupee Loan and a sum of Rs. 6,59,15,922/- was outstanding towards FITL. It is also stated that after the date of NPA, the Applicant Bank received a sum of Rs. 13,18,78,550/- in Rupee Loan; Rs. 39,25,695/- in Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 48,99,143/- in FITL A/c from the Defendants and due adjustment for the same was granted in the account of the Defendant no. 1. As per RBI guidelines and prudent accounting system, no interest is to be debited in the account after it is classified as NPA, nevertheless, the defendants remains liable to pay Rs. 59,74,04,917/- as interest towards Rupee Loan; Rs. 2,08,73,842/- towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 3,11,14,402/- towards FITL from the date of NPA till the date of filing of present OA. The defendants are also liable to pay penal / additional interest for Rs. 6,29,41,550/- towards Rupee Loan, Rs. 22,13,385/- towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 33,10,689/- towards FITL. Thus, the Defendants no. 1 & 2 are liable to pay, jointly and severally, Rs. 177,30,74,917/- towards Rupee Loan; Rs. 6,38,21,531/- towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 9,54,41,871/- towards FITL to the Applicant no. 1. The Defendant no. 3 remains liable to the extent of Rs. 6,38,21,531.00 towards Additional Rupee Loan for which he stood guarantor, which he is liable to pay, jointly and severally along with Defendants no. 1 & 2.

In the books of Accounts of Applicant no. 2 on 31.03.2015, a sum of Rs. 1,08,85,70,456.17 was outstanding towards Rupee Loan and a sum of Rs. 12,30,91,490.97 was outstanding towards FITL. As per RBI guidelines and prudent accounting system, no interest is to be debited in the account after it is classified as NPA, nevertheless, the defendants remains liable to pay Rs. 83,06,66,839.51 interest towards Rupee Loan and Rs. 4,01,96,286.91 towards FITL from 31.03.2015 till the date of filing of present OA. Thus, the Defendants no. 1 & 2 are liable to pay, jointly and severally, Rs. 1,80,25,01,839.51 towards Rupee Loan and Rs. 14,94,61,070.47 towards FITL to the Applicant no. 2.

In the books of Accounts of Applicant no. 3 on 01.05.2014, a sum of Rs. 64,20,21,133.20 was outstanding towards Rupee Loan, a sum of Rs. 4,95,94,545.00 was outstanding towards Additional Rupee Loan and a sum of Rs. 9,30,56,506.52 was outstanding towards FITL. As per RBI guidelines and prudent accounting system, no interest is to be debited in the account after it is classified as NPA, nevertheless, the defendants remains liable to pay Rs. 79,25,336.00 as interest towards Rupee Loan; Rs. 4,95,45,323.00 towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 6,59,93,565.00 towards FITL from the date of NPA till the date of filing of present OA. The defendants are also liable to pay penal interest for Rs. 8,73,437.00 towards Rupee Loan, Rs. 30,35,061.00 towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 52,74,489.00 towards FITL. Thus, the 

Defendants no. 1 & 2 are liable to pay, jointly and severally, Rs. 143,54,50,906.00 towards Rupee Loan; Rs. 10,21,75,029.00 towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 16,043,24,560.50 towards FITL to the Applicant no. 3. The Defendant no. 3 remains liable to the extent of Rs. 10,21,75,029.00 towards Additional Rupee Loan for which he stood guarantor, which he is liable to pay, jointly and severally along with Defendants no. 1 & 2.

In the books of Accounts of Applicant no. 4, on the date of NPA, a sum of Rs. 43,39,30,641.39 was outstanding towards Rupee Loan, a sum of Rs. 2,35,81,598.00 was outstanding towards Additional Rupee Loan and a sum of Rs. 4,17,66,411.81 was outstanding towards FITL. As per RBI guidelines and prudent accounting system, no interest is to be debited in the account after it is classified as NPA, nevertheless, the defendants remains liable to pay Rs. 24,68,32,058.82 as interest towards Rupee Loan; Rs. 1,39,81,420.91 towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 2,47,63,113.32 towards FITL from the date of NPA till the date of filing of present OA. The defendants are also liable to pay penal interest for Rs. 3,08,33,002.98 towards Rupee Loan, Rs. 17,58,605.75 towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 31,14,744.46 towards FITL. Thus, the Defendants no. 1 & 2 are liable to pay, jointly and severally, Rs. 65,34,73,031.04 towards Rupee Loan; Rs. 3,93,21,624.66 towards Additional Rupee Loan and Rs. 6,96,44,269.59 towards FITL to the Applicant no. 4. The Defendant no. 3 remains liable to the extent of Rs. 3,93,21,624.66 towards Additional Rupee Loan for which he stood guarantor, which he is liable to pay, jointly and severally along with Defendants no. 1 & 2.


In the books of Accounts of Applicant no. 5 / Dena Bank, Sl. No., nature of Facility, outstanding amount as on 21.02.2019 is as follows:- **A. Term Loan 1A / C (098957023783) :**

- (i) Ledger Balance : Rs. 367037010.19

- (ii) Unrecovered interest : Rs. 259032295.57

**Total :** Rs. 63,21,08,305.76

**B. FITL A/C (098957023924) :**

- (i) Ledger Balance : Rs. 0.00

- (ii) Unrecovered interest : Rs. 33172416.00

- (iii) Interest reversed : Rs. 47777180.00

**Total :** Rs. 8,09,49,596.00

**C. Additional Term Loan A/C (098957023926) :**

- (i) Ledger Balance : Rs. 23600000.00

- (ii) Unrecovered interest : Rs. 25714301.37

**Total :** Rs. 2,57,14,301.37

2.18 It is stated in the OA that the Defendant acknowledged the debt in its balance sheet as on 31.03.2018 and further signed the balance and security confirmation letters on 05.01.2011, 06.06.2012, 27.06.2013, 12.05.2014, 26.12.2016 and 31.01.2018.

2.19 It is also stated in the OA that Applicant no. 1 Bank vide its Notice dated 18.05.2018; Applicant no. 2 Bank vide 

its Notice dated 24.08.2018; Applicant no. 3 Bank vide its Notice dated 21.05.2018 and 22.05.2018; Applicant no. 4 Bank vide its Notice dated 08.01.2019 and Applicant no. 5 Bank vide its Notice dated 27.04.2018 called upon the Defendants no. 1 to 4 to pay the entire outstanding amount together with upto date interest but the Defendants failed to pay, hence, the Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5 have filed this OA before this Hon'ble Tribunal for seeking recovery of is dues from the defendants.

3. Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants, however, all the defendants neither appeared nor filed any WS, hence, the case was proceeded ex parte, vide order dated 05.09.2019 of the Tribunal, qua all the defendants except defendant no. 4 as the defendant no. 4 was before Ld. NCLT, Delhi and no relief is claimed qua said defendant by the applicants herein.

Thereafter, due to non appearance of the defendants, the case was again proceeded ex parte qua all the defendants including defendant no. 4 vide order dated 31.05.2022 of the Tribunal.

It is pertinent to note here that though defendant no. 4 / corporate guarantor to defendant no. 1 has been impleaded in this OA, however, no relief is claimed by the applicants qua defendant no. 4 on the ground that the CIRP proceedings are pending qua defendant no. 4 before Ld. NCLT, Delhi.

It is also matter of record that defendant no. 5 / IL&FS Trust Company Ltd. (security trustee) has been impleaded in this OA as proforma defendant and no relief is claimed by the applicants qua said defendant as well.

3.1 It is also matter of record that after proceeding the case ex parte, defendants no. 1 & 4 appeared through their respective counsel(s) but did not chose to file any WS.

4. To prove its case, the Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5 lead their evidence by filling the affidavit(s) of their respective authorized officers who placed reliance upon the documents filed by the Applicant Bank(s) at the time of filing of this OA.

4.1 It is pertinent to note here that during the pendency of this OA, name of Applicant no. 5 i.e. Dena Bank was substituted with Bank of Baroda vide order dated 05.07.2024 passed in IA No. 125/2024 of this Tribunal.

4.2 Subsequently, Applicants no. 1 to 5 assigned their respective debt(s) in favour of National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (NARCL) and the name of NARCL was substituted in place of all the applicants no. 1 to 5 vide order dated 18.12.2024 passed in IA No. 1053/2024 by this Tribunal. Accordingly, amended memo of parties was also filed.

Consequently, NARCL filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Varun Deepak, Senior Manager and authorized Signatory of India Debt Resolution Company Limited (IDRCL) being the power of attorney holder of NARCL who has placed reliance upon the following documents which includes :-

- (i) Copy of power of attorney dated 08.07.2024 executed by the Applicant and Board Resolution of IDRCL dated 26.09.2024 in favour of the deponent (Ex. AW-6/1-colly);

- (ii) Board Resolution dated 02.05.2008 of defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/2);

- (iii) Common Loan Agreement dated 02.05.2008 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/3);

- (iv) Joint Deed of Hypothecation dated 02.05.2008 in favour of IL&FS Trust Company Ltd. being the "Security Trustee" executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/4);

- (v) Escrow Agreement dated 29.09.2008 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/5);

- (vi) Inter Se Agreement dated 02.05.2008 executed amongst Lenders which was also signed for and on behalf of defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/6);

- (vii) Agreement of Guarantee dated 02.05.2008 executed by defendant no. 2 (Ex. AW-6/7);

- (viii) Board Resolution dated 02.05.2008 of defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/8);

- (ix) Deed of Pledge dated 07.10.2008 executed by defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/9);

- (x) Supplementary Common Loan Agreement dated 29.09.2008 executed between the Defendant no. 1 and the Lenders (Ex. AW-6/10);

- (xi) Board Resolution dated 29.11.2013 of Defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/11);

- (xii) Supplementary Term Loan Agreement dated 29.11.2013 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/12);

- (xiii) FITL Agreement dated 29.11.2013 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/13);

- (xiv) Agreement of Guarantee dated 29.11.2013 executed by defendant no. 2 (Ex. AW-6/14);

- (xv) Agreement of Guarantee dated 29.11.2013 executed by defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/15);

- (xvi) Board Resolution of defendant no. 4 dated 28.09.2013 (Ex. AW-6/16);

- (xvii) Sanction Letter dated 29.11.2013 of PNB (Ex. AW-6/17);

- (xviii) Sanction Letter dated 26.02.2014 issued by IIFCL (Ex. AW-6/18);

- (xix) Sanction Letter dated 21.03.2014 issued by IIFCL (Ex. AW-6/19);

- (xx) Sanction Letter dated 31.12.2013 of State Bank of Patiala (Ex. AW-6/20);

- (xxi) Sanction Letter dated 28.12.2013 of Bank of Baroda (previously Dena Bank) (Ex. AW-6/21);

- (xxii) Resolution dated 31.01.2014 of defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/22);

- (xxiii) Second Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement dated 31.01.2014 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/23);

- (xxiv) Supplementary Joint Deed of Hypothecation dated 31.01.2014 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/24); A handwritten signature in blue ink is positioned above a solid green rectangular stamp. The signature appears to be a stylized '20' or similar characters.

- (xxv) Supplementary Inter Se Agreement dated 31.01.2014 executed amongst the Lenders and Defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/25);

- (xxvi) Supplementary Deed of Pledge dated 31.01.2024 executed by defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/26);

- (xxvii) Agreement of Guarantee dated 31.01.2014 executed by defendant no. 2 (Ex. AW-6/27);

- (xxviii) Agreement of Guarantee dated 31.01.2014 executed by defendant no. 2 (Ex. AW-6/28);

- (xxix) Agreement of Guarantee dated 31.01.2014 executed by defendant no. 4 with Board Resolution dated 14.11.2013 of defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/29-colly);

- (xxx) Board Resolution dated 20.03.2014 of defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/30);

- (xxxi) Third Supplementary Agreement to Common Loan Agreement dated 21.03.2014 executed by defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/31);

- (xxxii) Second Supplementary Joint Deed of Hypothecation dated 21.03.2014 (Ex. AW-6/32);

- (xxxiii) Supplementary Inter Se Agreement dated 31.03.2014 executed amongst the predecessor applicant banks and defendant no. 1 (Ex. AW-6/33);

- (xxxiv) Deed of Guarantee dated 21.03.2014 executed by defendant no. 2 (Ex. AW-6/34);

- (xxxv) Deed of Guarantee dated 21.03.2014 of defendant no. 4 along with Board Resolution dated 14.02.2014 of defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/35-colly);

- (xxxvi) Second Supplementary Deed of Pledge dated 21.03.2014 executed by defendant no. 4 (Ex. AW-6/36);

- (xxxvii) Statement of Account of PNB of Rupee Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/37);

- (xxxviii) Statement of Account of PNB of FITL a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/38);

- (xxxix) Statement of Account of PNB of Additional Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/39);

- (xl) Calculation Sheet of PNB (Ex. AW-6/40);

- (xli) Statement of Account of IIFCL of Rupee Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/41);

- (xlii) Statement of Account of IIFCL of FITL a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/42 & AW-6/43);

- (xliii) Calculation Sheet of IIFCL (Ex. AW-6/44);

- (xliv) Statement of Account of Central Bank of India (CBI) of Rupee Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/45);

- (xlv) Statement of Account of CBI of FITL a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/46);

- (xlvi) Statement of Account of CBI of Additional Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/47);

- (xlvii) Calculation Sheet of CBI (Ex. AW-6/48);

- (xlviii) Statement of Account of SBI of Rupee Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/49); 

- (xlix) Statement of Account of SBI of FITL a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/50);

- (l) Statement of Account of SBI of Additional Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/51);

- (li) Calculation Sheet of SBI (Ex. AW-6/52);

- (lii) Statement of Account of Bank of Baroda (previously Dena Bank) of Rupee Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/53);

- (liii) Statement of Account of Bank of Baroda (previously Dena Bank) of FITL a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/54);

- (liv) Statement of Account of Bank of Baroda (previously Dena Bank) of Additional Term Loan a/w certificate (Ex. AW-6/55);

- (lv) Calculation Sheet of Bank of Baroda (previously Dena Bank) (Ex. AW-6/56);

- (lvi) Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2018 of the defendant acknowledging the debt (Ex. AW-6/57);

- (lvii) Balance & Security Confirmation Letters dated 05.01.2011, 06.06.2012, 27.06.2013, 12.05.2014, 26.12.2016 and 31.01.2018 executed by the Defendant (Ex. AW-6/58-colly);

- (lviii) Notice dated 18.05.2018 issued by PNB to defendants no. 1 to 4 (Ex. AW-6/59);

- (lix) Notice dated 24.08.2018 issued by IIFCL to defendants no. 1 to 4 (Ex. AW-6/60);

- (lx) Notice dated 21.05.2018 issued by CBI to defendants no. 1 to 4 (Ex. AW-6/61);

- (lxi) Notice dated 08.01.2019 issued by SBI to defendants no. 1 to 4 (Ex. AW-6/62);

- (lxii) Notice dated 27.04.2018 issued by BOB (previous Dena Bank) to defendants no. 1 to 4 (Ex. AW-6/63).

6. Applicant herein (NARCL being assignee of predecessor Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5) has also filed its written submissions.

7. Heard and perused the record. It is matter of record that all the defendants are already ex parte, as stated above, Though, after proceeding the case ex parte, defendants no. 1 & 4 appeared through their respective counsel(s) but they did not chose to file any WS, thus, the case of Applicant herein (being assignee of predecessor Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5) remained uncontested by all the defendants.

7.1 It is pertinent to note here that it is matter of record (as per OA itself) that CIRP proceedings have been commenced qua defendant 4 / corporate Guarantor to the Borrower Company i.e. Defendant no. 1 before Ld. NCLT, Delhi.

Since CIRP proceedings qua defendant no. 4 herein are pending before Ld. NCLT, hence, no relief has been claimed by applicants qua defendant no. 4 herein at the time of filing of this OA.

Even otherwise, since CIRP proceedings qua defendant no. 4 are pending before Ld. NCLT, hence, no order qua defendant no. 4 can be passed by this Tribunal as well, at this stage.

However, it is directed that applicant shall be at liberty to revive the OA qua defendant no. 4 in case NCLT proceedings are quashed / withdrawn in future, in accordance with law.

It is also directed that in case Applicant Bank receive any amount from the CIRP proceedings qua Defendant no. 4 / Corporate Guarantor to Borrower Company, pending before Ld. NCLT, Delhi, it shall give due adjustment of the same in the recovery proceedings.

7.2 It is also pertinent to note here that during the pendency of this OA, Ld. counsel for applicants informed the Tribunal that personal insolvency proceedings have been commenced qua defendants 2 & 3 / Personal Guarantors to the Borrower Company before Ld. NCLT, Delhi and placed on record the relevant orders passed by Ld. NCLT.

Since personal insolvency proceedings qua defendants no. 2 & 3 herein are pending before Ld. NCLT, hence, no order qua defendants no. 2 & 3 can be passed by this Tribunal, at this stage.

However, it is directed that applicant shall be at liberty to revive the OA qua defendants no. 2 & 3 in case NCLT proceedings are quashed / withdrawn in future, in accordance with law.

It is also directed that in case Applicant receives any amount from the personal insolvency proceedings qua Defendants no. 2 & 3 / Personal Guarantors to Borrower Company, pending before Ld. NCLT, Delhi, it shall give due adjustment of the same in the recovery proceedings.

7.3 So far as, defendant no. 1 is concerned, it is already ex parte and no pleadings were filed by it as well, hence, the case of Applicants herein remained uncontested by Defendant no. 1.

7.4 On the other hand, the witness of Applicant/s has fully corroborated the averments made in the OA. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant is based on the documents and the witness has duly proved all these documents. The evidence filed by the applicants gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the evidence lead by the applicant bank and applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts. Accordingly, the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the entire amount, as claimed in the OA from the defendants, along with pendentelite interest @12% p.a. and costs of this OA.

7.5. In this OA, Applicant herein (being assignee of predecessor Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5) has prayed to issue recovery certificate against defendants no. 1 to 3 (defendant no. 1 being principal borrower and defendants no. 2 & 3 being personal guarantors to the borrower company).

7.6 It is matter of record that defendant no. 5 has been impleaded in this OA as proforma defendant and applicant has not sought any relief qua said defendant.

7.7 Though no relief has been claimed by the applicants qua defendant no. 4 / corporate guarantor to borrower company since CIRP proceedings qua defendant no. 4 herein are pending before Ld. NCLT, Delhi, no order qua defendant no. 4 can be passed by this Tribunal as well, at this stage.

Similarly, since personal insolvency proceedings qua defendants no. 2 & 3 herein are also pending before Ld.

NCLT, Delhi, no order qua defendants no. 2 & 3 can be passed by this Tribunal at this stage.

However, it is directed that applicants shall be at liberty to revive the OA qua defendants no. 2 & 3 in case NCLT proceedings are quashed / withdrawn in future, in accordance with law.

It is also directed that in case Applicant receives any amount from the CIRP / personal insolvency proceedings qua Defendants no. 4 as well as Defendants no. 2 & 3 (being Corporate and personal Guarantors to Borrower Company), pending before Ld. NCLT, Delhi, it shall give due adjustment of the same in the recovery proceedings.

8. Consequently, TA No. 472/2022 is liable to be allowed in favour of the Applicant herein (being assignee of predecessor Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5) and against defendant 1 / Borrower Company, as it is liable to pay the dues of the Applicant herein along with costs and pendentelite & future interest @12% p.a. from the date of filing of the OA till its actual realization in full.

ORDER

- (i) TA No. 472/2022 stands allowed in favour of applicant (being assignee of predecessor Applicant Banks no. 1 to 5) against defendant no. 1 for a sum of Rs. 692,15,55,489.69 (Rupees Six Hundred Ninety Two Crore Fifteen Lakh Fifty Five Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Sixty Nine only) in following manner:-

<thead> <tr> <th><b>Applicant Nos. &amp; Facility Name</b></th> <th><b>Amount due</b></th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td><b><u>Applicant no. 1 / NARCL</u><br/>(being assignee of PNB)</b></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 177,30,74,917.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 63,82,15,131.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>Rs. 9,54,41,871.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td><b><u>Applicant no. 2 / NARCL</u><br/>(being assignee of IIFCL)</b></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan 1</td> <td>Rs. 108,85,70,456.17</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>Rs. 12,30,91,490.97</td> </tr> <tr> <td><b><u>Applicant no. 3 / NARCL</u><br/>(being assignee of CBI)</b></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 143,54,50,906.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 10,21,75,029.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>Rs. 16,43,24,560.50</td> </tr> <tr> <td><b><u>Applicant no. 4 / NARCL</u><br/>(being assignee of SBI)</b></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 65,34,73,031.04</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 3,93,21,624.66</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>Rs. 6,96,44,269.59</td> </tr> <tr> <td><b><u>Applicant no. 5 / NARCL</u><br/>(being assignee of BOB)</b></td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 63,21,08,305.76</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Additional Rupee Loan</td> <td>Rs. 2,57,14,301.00</td> </tr> <tr> <td>FITL</td> <td>Rs. 8,09,49,596.00</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

along with pendentelite and future interest @12% p.a. from the date of filing of the OA till its actual realization in full; along with costs of this OA. Now Defendant no. 1 is directed to pay the aforesaid amount(s) to the Applicant herein within 30-days, failing which, the aforesaid amount(s) shall be recovered from the sale of secured assets (mortgaged / hypothecated / pledged) belonging to defendant no. 1.

In case of shortfall, same shall be recovered from the sale movable and immovable assets of the defendant no. 1.

(ii) Since personal insolvency proceedings / CIRP proceedings qua defendants no. 2 & 3 and Defendant no. 4 herein are pending before Ld. NCLT, Delhi, no order qua defendants no. 2, 3 & 4 can be passed by this Tribunal at this stage.

However, it is directed that applicant shall be at liberty to revive the OA qua defendants no. 2 & 3 as well as defendant no. 4 in case NCLT proceedings are quashed / withdrawn in future, in accordance with law.

It is also directed that in case Applicant receives any amount from the CIRP / personal insolvency proceedings pending qua Defendants no. 4 as well as Defendants no. 2 & 3 (being Corporate and personal Guarantors to Borrower Company), pending before Ld. NCLT, Delhi, it shall give due adjustment of the same in the recovery proceedings.

A small, dark, rectangular stamp or mark located at the bottom right of the page, below the page number. It appears to be a digital or physical stamp, possibly containing text that is not legible.

- (iii) It is also directed that the sale proceeds of the secured assets shall be distributed between the consortium members, as per inter-se agreements executed amongst them.

- (iv) It is also directed that the Applicant shall adjust the amount(s), if any, received from the defendant(s) during the pendency of this case.

- (v) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer-II, Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Delhi.

- (vi) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer-II, DRT-III, Delhi on 08.04.2026.

- (vii) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

File be closed and consigned to records.

05.02.2026 (SHIV KUMAR - I) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, DELHI

(Pronounced in open court) Dated: 05.02.2026

This image shows a blank, aged, cream-colored page, likely an endpaper or flyleaf from an old book. The paper has a slightly textured appearance with some minor discoloration and faint smudges. A small, dark, horizontal mark is visible near the center-left edge, possibly a stain or a mark from a previous page. The overall tone is warm and yellowish, characteristic of old paper.