Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs M/S ONKAR PRASAD AGARWAL on 26 April 2024
DRT, ALLAHABAD1TA 93 of 2019 [J]**Debts Recovery Tribunal, Allahabad,**
9/2A, Panna Lal Road Allahabad
Presiding Officer : **Shri R. M. Kushawaha****TA Case No. : 93 OF 2019**
**Kotak Mahindra Bank**, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and Banking Company within the meaning of Section 5 (C) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, and having its Registered Office at: 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 and a Branch Office amongst others at: 1/11, 1<sup>st</sup> Floor, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi – 110008 through its Authorized Signatory: Shri G. S. Pandey, Chief Manager.
.....Applicant -Bank
Vs.
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.
1. 1. **M/s Onkar Prasad Agarwal** [Proprietor Firm – Prop. Ram Das Goyal], having Regd. Office at: Flat No. 403, 4<sup>th</sup> Floor, Maruti Plaza, Sanjay Place, Agra – 282005, Uttar Pradesh.
2. 2. **Ram Das Goyal HUF** (through its Karta Mr. Abhishek Goyal), Proprietor & Guarantor having address at: Flat No. 403, 4<sup>th</sup> Floor, Maruti Plaza, Sanjay Place, Agra – 282005, Uttar Pradesh.
**Also at:**
404, Friends Ashiyana Khandari, Agra – 282005, Uttar Pradesh.
1. 3. **Mrs. Anjali Goyal**, Mortgagor & Guarantor having address at: 404, Friends Ashiyana Khandari, Agra – 282005, Uttar Pradesh.
2. 4. **Mr. Abhishek Goyal**, Mortgagor & Guarantor having address at: 404, Friends Ashiyana Khandari, Agra – 282005, Uttar Pradesh.
...Defendants.
Present:
**For the Applicant**
: Shri Rakesh Mishra, Advocate
**For the Defendants**
: Shri Gautam Kumar, Advocate
**Dated: 26.04.2024****JUDGMENT**
1- The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, now Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 26.07.2019, before DRT, Delhi – I against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs. 10,46,21,093.20 as on 31.05.2018 alongwith pendentelite and future interest @ contractual rate of interest from 01.06.2018 with costs till realization.
having its Registered Office at: 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 and a Branch Office amongst others at: 1/11, 1st Floor, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi – 110008 through its Authorized Signatory: Shri G. S. Pandey, Chief Manager.
The facts of the case as contained in the application are that the defendant No. 1 is sole proprietor firm having its Registered Office as mentioned in cause title, is the borrower. The defendant No. 2 is the guarantor and defendant No. 3 and 4 are guarantors and mortgagor. The defendant No. 1 approached the Applicant Bank for takeover of their Loan against Property from and addition facility of Cash Credit of Rs. 3.00 Crores. Based on the request of the defendant No. 1, the Applicant Bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 04.07.2014 and addendum Sanction Letter dated 18.07.2014 granted Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 300.00 lacs and Conditional WCDL of Rs. 30.00 lacs on the terms and conditions mentioned therein, which was duly accepted by defendant No. 1.
In order to secure the due repayment of the Applicant Bank in respect of aforesaid credit facilities, the defendants have mortgaged their immovable properties and other securities to avail the Loan Against Property and also have signed, executed and delivered several security documents.
The details of the securities are as under:- Primary:
First and exclusive charge on all existing and future current assets and movable fixed asset of the Borrower.
Collateral:
All that Part & Parcel of vacant land admeasuring 8145.00 Sq. Mtrs. Which is $\frac{1}{4}^{\text{th}}$ share of 3.258 Hectares along with superstructures including all present and future rights, title, interest, easements, privileges, fittings, fixtures, connections, rights in entrances, passages, staircase, present and future development rights and other common facilities and amenities provided therein situated in Khasra No. 193 at Village Manpur, Pargana Etah Sateek, Tehsil and District Etah, Uttar Pradesh.
Description of immovable property-Mr. Abhishek Goyal:
All that part & Parcel of vacant land admeasuring 16290 Sq. Mtrs. Which is $\frac{1}{2}$ share of 3.258 Hectares along with superstructures including all present and future rights, title, interest, easements, privileges, fittings, fixtures, connections, rights in entrances, passages, staircase, present and future development rights and other common facilities and amenities provided therein situated in Khasra No. 193 at Village Manpur, Pargana Etah Sateek, Tehsil and District Etah, Uttar Pradesh.
Subsequently, on the request of the defendant No. 1 & 2, Applicant Bank granted adhoc Cash Credit Facility amounting to Rs. 45.00 lacs vide Adhoc Sanction Letter dated 03.02.2015.
Subsequently, in the month of June, 2015 again on request of defendant No. 1 & 2, Applicant Bank granted adhoc Cash Credit Facility amounting to Rs. 45.00 lacs for a tenure of 90 days vide Adhoc Sanction Letter dated 22.06.2015.
Again on the request of defendant No. 1 & 2 renewed/enhanced the existing financial facilities and granted fresh facilities to defendant No. 1 vide its Sanction Letter dated 24.08.2015 and addendum Sanction Letter dated 14.09.2015 and addendum Sanction Letter dated 14.09.2015.
In order to secure the due repayment of the Applicant Bank in respect of aforesaid credit facilities, the defendants hypothecated the assets, mortgaged their immovable properties and other securities to avail the Loan Against Property and also have signed, executed and delivered several security documents.
The details of the securities are as under:- Primary:
First and exclusive charge on all existing and future current assets and movable fixed assets of the Borrowers.
1. i. Book Debts, receivable, outstanding moneys, claims, demands, bills, contracts, engagement and securities belonging to or held by the Borrowers and which are now due and owing to the Borrower
2. ii. Stocks of raw material, finished and semi-finished goods, goods in process and consumable stores, which are now lying or stored in or which may hereafter from time to time during the continuance of the security be lying or stored in our brought into or be or about the factories and go downs of the Borrower or warehouses wherever situated.
3. iii. Moveable plant and machinery, equipment, appliances, furniture etc.
4. iv. Related movables in the course of transit or delivery or which may be held by any person at any place within or outside India to the order or disposition of the Borrower and all documents, policies of insurance and other instruments and documents relating to such movables together with benefits of all rights thereto.
Collateral:
1-Description of immovable property-Mrs. Anjali Goyal:
All that part parcel of vacant land admeasuring 8145.00 Sq. Mtrs. Which is $\frac{1}{4}^{\text{th}}$ share of 3.258 Hectares along with superstructures including all present and future rights, title, interest, easements, privileges, fittings, fixtures, connections, rights in entrances, passages, staircase, present and future development rights and other common facilities and amenities provided therein situated in Khasra No. 193 at Village Manpur, Pargana Etah Sateek, Tehsil and District Etah, Uttar Pradesh.
2-Description of immovable property – Mr. Abhishek Goyal:
All that part & Parcel of vacant land admeasuring 16290 Sq. Mtrs. Which is $\frac{1}{2}$ share of 3.258 Hectares along with superstructures including all present and future rights, title, interest, easements, privileges, fittings, fixtures, connections, rights in entrances, passages, staircase, present and future development rights and other common facilities and amenities provided therein situated in Khasra No. 193 at Village Manpur, Pargana Etah Sateek, Tehsil and District Etah, Uttar Pradesh.
3-Description of immovable property – Mr. Abhishek Goyal:
All that part & Parcel of Space/Office/Shop bearing No. F-17 admeasuring super area of 89.18 Sq. Mtrs. i.e. 960 Sq. Feet on first floor along with superstructures including all present and future rights, title, interest, easements, privileges, fittings, fixtures, connections, rights in entrances, passages, staircase, present and future development rights and other common facilities and amenities provided therein situated in Star City Mall built on commercial plot bearing No. 01A, admeasuring 5680 Sq. Mtrs. at District Centre, Mayur Place, Mayur Vihar Phase-I, New Delhi.
3. The defendants availed the aforesaid facilities but failed to repay the dues of the bank as per agreed terms, they failed to adhere the financial discipline of the applicant bank, the account of the defendants became irregular and sticky and were declared NPA on 30.06.2016. The applicant Bank sent Legal/ demand notice/Recall cum Invocation of Guarantee on 01.09.2016 to the defendants but despite receipt of the same, the defendants failed to liquidate bank's dues. All these acts and conduct on the part of the defendants are contrary to the terms and conditions of the documents signed and executed by defendants on behalf of defendant no. 1. Accordingly the applicant bank has moved this O.A. to recover public money.
The total outstanding due in the accounts comes to Rs. 10,46,21,093.20 inclusive of interests which has been claimed by means of present O.A.
The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.
Since, the defendants have failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.
4- U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule 11 of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993, copies of application & paper book were sent by this Tribunal to the defendants by registered/speed post on 14.08.2019, and summons/notices issued requiring the defendants to show-cause within 30 days of the service of summons/notices as to why relief prayed for, should not be granted.
On perusal of the case records, it is seen that on 14.08.2019, summons/notices were sent to the defendants and the defendants have appeared through their counsel by filing vakalatnama.
Against the registered summons/notices, the defendants have appeared through their counsel before this Tribunal to contest the case by filing written submission and the arguments were advanced.
5- To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred attested copies of various documents before this Tribunal on 26.07.2019. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit of Shri G. S. Pandey, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows. :-
<table border="1"> <thead> <tr> <th>Sl.No</th> <th>Description of Documents(Attested copies)</th> <th>Date of Execution</th> <th>Amount [In lacs]</th> <th>Signature of executants</th> <th>Ex./ Ann. No.</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>1</td> <td>Copy of the Authorization</td> <td>23.04.2018</td> <td>--</td> <td>Bank</td> <td>A- 1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2</td> <td>Copy of the Sanction Letter</td> <td>04.07.2014</td> <td>330.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A- 2</td> </tr> <tr> <td>3</td> <td>Copy of the Addendum Sanction Letter</td> <td>21.07.2014</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A- 3</td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td>Copy of the Master Fund Based Facility Agreement</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>330.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A- 4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>5</td> <td>Copy of the Deed of Hypothecation</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A- 5</td> </tr> <tr> <td>6</td> <td>Copy of the Deed of Guarantee</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A- 6</td> </tr> <tr> <td>7</td> <td>Copy of the Statement and Declaration of Responsibility and Liability</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A- 7</td> </tr> <tr> <td>8</td> <td>Copy of the Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>30.00</td> <td>Def. 1, 2 & 4</td> <td>A- 8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>9</td> <td>Copy of the Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>300.00</td> <td>Def. 1, 2 & 4</td> <td>A- 9</td> </tr> <tr> <td>10</td> <td>Copy of the Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>300.00</td> <td>Def. 1, 2 & 4</td> <td>A- 10</td> </tr> <tr> <td>11</td> <td>Copy of the Take Delivery Letter to Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>300.00</td> <td>Def. 2 & 4</td> <td>A- 11</td> </tr> <tr> <td>12</td> <td>Copy of the TBC Undertaking</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>330.00</td> <td>Def. 2 & 4</td> <td>A- 12</td> </tr> <tr> <td>13</td> <td>Copy of the End Use Undertaking</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>330.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-13</td> </tr> <tr> <td>14</td> <td>Copy of the Power of Attorney –Mortgage</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A-14</td> </tr> <tr> <td>15</td> <td>Copy of the Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds</td> <td>23.07.2014</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A-15</td> </tr> <tr> <td>16</td> <td>Copy of the Undertaking – Mortgage</td> <td>23.07.20</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table border="1"> <thead> <tr> <th></th> <th>Declaration of Responsibility and Liability</th> <th></th> <th></th> <th></th> <th></th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>26</td> <td>Copy of the General Undertaking</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-26</td> </tr> <tr> <td>27</td> <td>Copy of the Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>400.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-27</td> </tr> <tr> <td>28</td> <td>Copy of the Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>50.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-28</td> </tr> <tr> <td>29</td> <td>Copy of the Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>95.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-29</td> </tr> <tr> <td>30</td> <td>Copy of the Take Delivery Letter to Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>400.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-30</td> </tr> <tr> <td>31</td> <td>Copy of the Take Delivery Letter to Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>50.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-31</td> </tr> <tr> <td>32</td> <td>Copy of the Take Delivery Letter to Demand Promissory Note</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>95.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-32</td> </tr> <tr> <td>33</td> <td>Copy of the Memorandum of Entry for mortgage by Constructive Delivery of Title Deeds</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>545.00</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A-33</td> </tr> <tr> <td>34</td> <td>Copy of the Undertaking-Mortgage</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>545.00</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A-34</td> </tr> <tr> <td>35</td> <td>Copy of the Declaration-Mortgage</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A-35</td> </tr> <tr> <td>36</td> <td>Copy of the Power of Attorney –Mortgage</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 3 & 4</td> <td>A-36</td> </tr> <tr> <td>37</td> <td>Copy of the Supplementary cum Modification Agreement</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>330.00</td> <td>Def. 1, 3 & 4</td> <td>A-37</td> </tr> <tr> <td>38</td> <td>Copy of the TBC Undertaking</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-38</td> </tr> <tr> <td>39</td> <td>Copy of the End Use Undertaking</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>545.00</td> <td>Def. 1 & 4</td> <td>A-39</td> </tr> <tr> <td>40</td> <td>Copy of the Power of Attorney –Mortgage</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 4</td> <td>A-40</td> </tr> <tr> <td>41</td> <td>Copy of the Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds</td> <td>07.09.2015</td> <td>--</td> <td>Def. 4</td> <td>A-41</td> </tr> <tr> <td>42</td> <td>Copy of the Undertaking – Mortgage</td> <td>07.09.</td></tr></tbody></table>
Ld. counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary and oral evidence. Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank further submitted that the Applicant Bank have recovered a sum of Rs. 1,16,60,000/- by selling the property No. 3 through SARFAESI actions, after filing of the OA.
It is further submitted by ld. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no any stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.
The learned counsel for the defendants appeared and in Written Submission, the defendants ultimately admitted that the defendants had availed the loan facilities & utilized the same. The learned counsel for the defendants further submitted that the rate of interest charged in the present matter is at very higher side, therefore, the same may be reduced.
7- It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Uttar Pradesh. Cause of action also arose in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.
8- On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 30.06.2016, whereas the present application has been filed on 26.07.2019. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period from the date of declaring the account as NPA. As such, it is established that present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.
9- In the affidavit of Shri G. S. Pandey, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, has stated that he is well acquainted with the facts of the case and has on verification of record, sworn in the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and established on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.
The documents as stated above reveal that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, which strength the case of the applicant bank.
The applicant bank has also furnished statement of account as above, which is not only admissible but shall be taken as correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account has not been challenged.
10- The defendants through their counsel appeared and in Written Submission, admitted their liabilities and also requested for reduction in the rate of interest therefore, the contentions raised and documents produced by applicant Bank appear to be correct and the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant as per law. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account, which is kept in due course of business, evidence on affidavit, which has supported the claim of the applicant bank, established to have fully correct and believable. Provisions contained in Section 4 of the Banker's Books Evidence Act, 1891 apply to certified copies of entries in banker's book furnished along with the application filed under section 19[1] of the Act. Hence, the entries in the Statement of Account are also proved.
11- On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the application, documents, admission of defendants and affidavit, it is proved that the applicant bank has granted the loan facilities, documents were executed by the defendants and facilities were availed by the defendants as stated in the application.
12- Now, whether interest has been charged as per agreement and as per R.B.I. Guidelines?
13- The applicant bank has sought for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,46,21,093.20 with cost and further interest @ contractual rate of interest from 01.06.2018 till realization. But during the pendency of O.A., the counsel for the Applicant Bank submitted that the Bank has recovered a sum of Rs. 1,16,60,000/- by selling the property No. 3 through SARFAESI actions, and after deducting the total recovered amount, the total outstanding dues comes to Rs. 9,29,61,093.20 (Rs. 10,46,21,093.20 – Rs. 1,16,60,000/-) for which the defendants are liable.
14- Learned Advocate appearing for applicant bank submits that the applicant bank has charged interest in terms of the agreements and that interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.
15- On consideration of the arguments and on perusal of the pleadings, documents, admission of defendants and affidavit, it is proved that the applicant has charged interest against defendants in terms of documents and as per directives of R B I, but keeping the facts and circumstances of the case in mind, the defendants deserve some leniency in the rate of interest.
16- The defendants appeared before the Tribunal to contest the claim made by the applicant, therefore, it necessarily goes to establish that the claim made by the applicant bank is genuine and true. It is manifest that the defendants have not disputed the claim, therefore, the claim referred to the Tribunal is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim. In the matters of admission, the relevant section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 runs as under:- **Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872**
"58 Facts admitted need not be proved. —No fact need to be proved in any proceeding which the parties thereto or their agents agree to admit at the hearing, or which, before the hearing, they agree to admit by any writing under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading in force at the time they are deemed to have admitted by their pleadings: Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be proved otherwise than by such admissions."
17- In *Indian Bank Vs. Blue Jaggers Estates Limited and others* [2010] 8 SCC 129, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has observed as under-
"The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the bank is a trustee of public fund. It cannot compromise the public interest for benefiting private individuals. Those who take loan and avail financial facilities from the bank are duty bound to repay the amount strictly in accordance with the terms of the contract. Any lapse in such matters has to be viewed seriously and the bank is not only entitled but duty bound to recover the amount by adopting all legally permissible methods. Parliament enacted the act because it was found that legal mechanism available till then was wholly insufficient for recovery of the outstanding dues of the banks and Financial Institutions."
18- Facts of the case, in my view, are well proved by evidence of the applicant bank. The applicant bank is entitled to receive its debts from defendants, jointly and severally Rs. 9,29,61,093.20 (Rs. 10,46,21,093.20 – Rs. 1,16,60,000/-) alongwith pendentelite and future interest @9% Simple per annum from 01.06.2018 till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.
**ORDER**
In the result, the application of the applicant bank is, allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants and it is, hereby, ordered that the applicant bank is entitled to receive its debts from defendants, jointly and severally, it's debts with interest, amounting to Rs. 9,29,61,093.20 (Rs. 10,46,21,093.20 – Rs. 1,16,60,000/-) alongwith pendentelite and future interest @9% Simple per annum from 01.06.2018 till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.
In case of failure to repay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the *hypothecated assets /mortgaged properties of the Defendants in execution proceedings. The amount, if any, already recovered by sale of any hypothecated assets /mortgage properties or otherwise shall be adjusted towards the debt and only the balance amount shall be recoverable. If the dues of Applicant Bank still remain unsatisfied, the same shall be recovered by attachment and sale of the personal movable and immovable assets of the Defendants jointly or severally. The cost of litigation be also borne by the Defendants.*
*The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, alienating, selling or otherwise dealing with hypothecated assets/ mortgage properties or their other immovable/movable properties/estates without first paying the above claim of Applicant Bank/Certificate Holder.*
*In case, any of the Defendants expire, the legal representatives shall be liable to pay in proportion to the inheritance.*
Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants.
Pending I. As. if any, stands disposed off.
Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Allahabad on 10.06.2024. The order be communicated accordingly.
Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on this 26<sup>th</sup> Day of April, 2024.
Dictated & Corrected by me.
[R. M. Kushawaha] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Allahabad
[R. M. Kushawaha] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Allahabad
AD