PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK vs M/S Joyram Traders Through Its Proprietor Mr Prasanta Saha on 2 September 2026

J U D G M E N T

1. The instant M.A. Dy. No. has been filed by the Misc. applicant/bank seeking restoration of O.A. No. 04 of 2023, instituted for recovery of Rs. 29,58,474.90/- (Rupees Ninety One Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Three Hundred Seventy One only) along with interest calculated upto 30.11.2022 and other reliefs against the opposite parties-defendants.

2. Case of the misc. applicant/ bank in short is that during pendency of the O.A., the matter was settled before the National Lok Adalat held on 09.09.2023, wherein the parties entered into a compromise for a total settlement amount of Rs. 8,50,000/-, out of which Rs. 1,70,000/- has to be deposited by 18.09.2023 and the balance amount of Rs. 6,80,000/- was agreed to be paid 09.12.2023. The Applicant Bank has contended that the defendant failed to make payment as per said terms and conditions after several reminders and requests. The MA applicant/Bank has further contended that since they have debarred from referring the matter before the bench of this Tribunal for adjudication of the claim amount and thus prayer has been made to issue the recovery certificate for recovery of the dues amount. The delay in filing the present M.A. has been explained as the defendant Mr. Prasanta Saha requested to the branch manager to extend the time as due to prolong treatment of his family member he not in a position to deposit the money and as such on the humanity ground applicant bank approve the time till December 2024 but inspite of RAKESH PATI TIWARI

TIWARI Date: 2026.09.04 15:04:34 +05'30'

such the defendant failed to make payment and prayer has been made to condone the delay of 487 days for filing the instant MA. Accordingly, the Applicant Bank/MA applicant has prayed for restoration of the Original Application and for proceeding with issuance of Recovery Certificate in accordance with law.

3. Service has been effected upon the opposite party through postal service but no one appears on behalf of he opposite party and as such the matter has been proceeded ex- parte against opposite party vide order dated 05.05.2026.

4. Learned counsel of the applicant has already been heard.

5. From perusal of the record it transpires that the Original Application was filed for recovery of the outstanding dues payable by the defendants and during pendency of the proceedings, the matter was amicably settled before the Lok Adalat on 09.09.2023 for an amount of Rs. 8.50 lakhs upon agreed terms and conditions and as per the terms of the settlement, 1st installment of Rs. 1.70 lakhs has to be deposited by 18.09.2023 and the 2nd installment of Rs. 6.80 lakhs has to be deposited positively by 09.12.2023. However, the defendants admittedly failed to adhere to the terms of settlement and did not pay the settled amount within the stipulated period, thereby rendering the compromise ineffective and frustrating the very object of settlement arrived at before the Lok Adalat.

6. In case of Navratan Lal Sharma Vs Radha Mohan Sharma &Ors. [CIVIL APPEAL NO. 14328/2024 @ SLP (CIVIL) NO. 27723 OF 2024 decided on dated 12.12.2024], the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that in case of non-compliance of the term of settlement, the compromise will be considered void. It is pertinent to mention here that in the aforesaid case also (supra) the Hon’ble Supreme Court had noticed that in para 4 of the Compromise Deed it was mentioned that in case of non compliance the appeal would be restored.

7. So far the instant matter is concerned there is one clause in the joint compromise petition (para no. 3) that in case of non–payment of the instalment amount on its due date, as per the settlement, the award of the Lok Adalat shall be treated as "Recovery Certificate" and directly recovery proceeding shall be initiated by the applicant bank for the recovery of original claim amount i.e. Rs.29,58,474.90 as on 30.11.2022 along with interest @ 12.05% per annum with monthly rests from 01.12.2022 without referring the matter before the bench of Debts Recovery Tribunal for adjudication of the claim amount.

8. This Tribunal finds substance in the submissions advanced on behalf of the Applicant Bank that the default committed by the defendants compelled the Bank to approach this Tribunal by filing the present Miscellaneous Application seeking restoration of the Original Application. The explanation furnished by the Applicant Bank regarding the delay of 487 RAKESH PATI TIWARI

TIWARI Date: 2026.09.04 15:05:01 +05'30'

days in filing the present application appears to be bona fide, reasonable and sufficiently explained. There is nothing on record to suggest that the delay was intentional, deliberate or caused due to negligence on the part of the Applicant Bank. On the contrary, it appears that the Applicant Bank acted diligently after it became evident that the defendants had no intention to honour the settlement terms.

9. It is also pertinent to mention here that the dues involved in the present proceedings pertain to public money advanced by the Applicant Bank in the ordinary course of banking business. Refusal to restore the matter would cause serious prejudice to the Applicant Bank and may result in miscarriage of justice, whereas no irreparable prejudice would be caused to the defendants if the matter is restored and decided on merits.

10. Accordingly, this Tribunal is satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown by the Applicant Bank for restoration of the Original Application. Hence, the prayer for restoration of O.A. No. 04 of 2023 deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice.

11. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, M.A. Dy No. 98 of 2025 filed by the applicant is hereby allowed by condoning the delay and the O.A. No. 04/2023 is restored in view of para No. 3 of the joint compromise petition.

12. Let a Recovery Certificate be issued in favour of the applicant bank for Rs. 29,58,474.90 along with interest as on 30.11.2022 with further interest thereon @12.05% per annum with monthly rests from 01.12.2022 till realization of the entire dues amount.

13. Registry is directed to send/serve copy of this order to both the parties free of cost.

14. Let the record be consigned to the record room after uploading the order on the website of the Tribunal.

The judgment is signed and pronounced in the open Tribunal on 2nd day of September, 2026.

(RAKESH PATI TIWARI) Presiding Officer DRT, Siliguri

RAKESH PATI TIWARI

TIWARI Date: 2026.09.04 15:05:14 +05'30'