Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
CANARA BANK vs M/S R.R. EXPORTS AND CHEMICALS on 25 June 2026
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER
TA No: 126/2024
Date of Institution: 10.12.2015
Date of Decision: 25.06.2026
Canara Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Shalamar Road, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir.
……..Applicant
Vs.
M/s R.R. Exports and Chemicals through Sh. Rajinder Dogra s/o Late Sh. Sat Pal Dogra, r/o Village Hakkal Old Satwari, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir.
……….Defendants
Advocates
Sh. Tarun Kumar, Nodal Officer for the applicant bank.
Defendants-ex parte vide order dated 10.11.2021.
TA for the Recovery of ₹55,69,855.54p with interest @11.65% per annum with monthly rests from 10.12.2015.
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.
ORDER
1. On 10.12.2015, Canara Bank, filed the suit for the recovery of ₹55,69,855.54p with interest against M/s R.R. Exports and Chemicals (defendant) in the District Court Jammu. However, vide order dated 08.04.2023, the Court of Additional District Judge, (Bank Cases), Srinagar transferred this suit to DRT-I, Chandigarh.
2. Bank’s case is that on 17.03.2010, it had granted O.C.C. Limit of ₹20.00 Lacs; Term Loan of ₹12.84 Lacs to defendant through its proprietor Rajinder Dogra for business purpose. To secure both the loans, Defendant No.1 through its proprietor had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.4a of the application). Again on 30.05.2012, at the request of the defendants, bank granted Fresh Term Loan of ₹2.25 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor for Vehicle purpose. To secure the loan facility of ₹2.25 Lacs, defendant no.1 hypothecated assets (fully detailed in Para 6(e) of the plaint). All the loan facilities were chargeable at different rates of interest. On 31.10.2015, a sum of ₹55,69,855.54p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, the suit.
3. The Civil Court sent summonses to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. Defendants did not put in appearance, before Civil Court, which proceeded ex parte on 21.01.2023.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Omkar Singh, Authorized Officer, along with the original 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 loans under various schemes and on 31.10.2015, a sum of ₹55,69,855.54p was due.
6. Accordingly, the case of the bank for the recovery of ₹55,69,855.54p (Rupees Fifty Five Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Five and Paise Fifty Four Only) with interest @11.65% per annum with monthly rests from 10.12.2015, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property fully detailed in para No.4(a) of the plaint and hypothecated assets fully detailed in Para 6(e) of the plaint as well as from 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 27.07.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and hypothecated assets as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.
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: 25.06.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA