PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK vs M/S Best Buy Electronics and Home Apliances on 18 August 2026

1. M/s.Best Buy Electronics & Home Appliances,

Kaloor, Kochi.

2. Suja Ria Rani (Dead),

W/o.Razick,

Partner of M/s.Best Buy Electronics & Home Appliances and M/s.Best Buy TV & Home Appliances,

Residing at D-1, J.K.Royal House, Chammani Road, Kaloor, Cochin.

3. K.A.Razick,

S/o.A.S.Hameed,

Partner of M/s.Best Buy Electronics & Home Appliances and M/s.Best Buy TV & Home Appliances,

Residing at D-1, J.K.Royal House, Chammani Road, Kaloor, Cochin.

4. Sulfikar Ali,

S/o.A.S.Hameed,

Partner of M/s.Best Buy Electronics &

Home Appliances, Residing at Puthen Purayil, Kayamkulam.

5. Sadath Hameed,

S/o.A.S.Hameed,

Partner of M/s.Best Buy Electronics & Home Appliances, Residing at Puthen Purayil, Kayamkulam.

…Defendants

6. Fahad Jalal,

S/o.J.Thahakunju (late),

Residing at Chengappaliyil Castle,

Bharanickavu P.O.,

Mavelikkara, Kattanam,

Alappuzha District – 690 503.

7. Firdouz Hameed,

S/o.J.Thahakunju (late),

Residing at Nida Mahal,

Peringala, Pallikkara,

Ernakulam District – 682 030. …Additional defendants [Additional defendants 6 and 7 were impleaded as legal heirs of deceased 2nd defendant as per order dated 07.08.2025 in IA No.3153/2025]

This Original Application having been heard on 27.07.2026 in the presence of Advocate Smt.Keerthi K.Narayan, representing counsel for Advocates M/s.P.Balakrishnan, N.Sasi and Sujesh Kumar for the applicant bank and stood over to this day for consideration, the Tribunal delivered the following: F I N A L O R D E R

This Original Application has been filed under S.19(1) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.72,06,857.74 due under cash credit account together with future interest thereon @13.50% per annum with monthly rests from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of ‘A’ and ‘B' schedule properties. Facts of the case:

2. The 1st defendant is a partnership firm and defendants 2 to 5 are its partners. At the request of the 1st defendant, erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce granted a cash credit limit of Rs.50 lakhs as per sanction letter dated 31.10.2006 and the defendants availed the facility after executing necessary documents. As primary security for the loan, the movables described in ‘A’ schedule was hypothecated to the bank and towards collateral security, the 2nd defendant created mortgage over ‘B’ schedule property and executed memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 02.11.2006 confirming the creation of mortgage. Subsequently, considering the request of the defendants, the cash credit facility was restructured on 12.10.2007. Due to default in repayment, the bank initiated securitization proceeding to recover the outstanding dues which was challenged by the defendants before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in W.P.(C) No.36678/2008 but they did not comply the direction of the Hon'ble High Court. Being unable to recover the outstanding dues, the bank was constrained to file this case claiming the following reliefs:

(i) To recover the sum of Rs.72,06,857.74 together with pendente lite and post decree interest thereon from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of ‘A’ and ‘B' schedule properties;

(ii) To recover the costs, charges and expenses from the defendants;

(iii) To issue Recovery Certificate to the Recovery Officer with a direction to recover the amount and pay it to the applicant bank. Written statement

3. Defendants 1 to 3 filed written statement denying the averments and contended inter alia that they never approached the applicant bank for any financial assistance nor executed any documents in favour of the bank. The 2nd defendant had not created any equitable mortgage as alleged in the application. In fact, the 2nd defendant approached the applicant bank for availing a home loan and entrusted some documents which were misused by the bank and created false debt on these defendants. It is claimed that signature seen on Annexure-A10 is not put by the

2nd defendant and Annexure-A19 is not executed by these defendants and they never made any such acknowledgement of debt in writing as alleged by the applicant. Hence no liability can be fastened on these defendants and the OA may be dismissed with exemplary costs.

4. Defendants 4 and 5 neither appeared nor were they represented and hence they were set exparte on 10.12.2010.

5. Pending the OA, the 2nd defendant died and additional defendants 6 and 7 are impleaded as legal heirs of the deceased 2nd defendant as per order dated 07.08.2025 in IA No.3153/2025. The additional defendants did not file written statement and none appeared and represented for them to advance argument in this case. Proof Affidavit:

6. To establish the claim on behalf of the applicant, one Mr.V.M.Sundareswaran and Mr.Rejeesh E., Chief Managers of the bank have filed proof affidavit and additional proof affidavit respectively and produced the loan documents marked as Exhibits A1 to A22. The availing of the cash credit limit is well established from the documents placed by the applicant bank.

7. Defendants 1 to 3 filed counter proof affidavit reiterating the same averments in their written statement and sought to dismiss the OA with costs.

8. Heard arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant bank. None appeared and represented for defendants 1 and 3 as well as additional defendants 6 and 7 to address argument in this case.

9. The sole issue arises for consideration is whether the applicant is entitled to get the relief as claimed in this case?

10. On a conspectus of the pleadings and evidence available on record, it appears that the 1st defendant partnership firm submitted Ext.A1 application for a loan of Rs.50 lakhs through its partners on 26.10.2006. Considering their request, erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce sanctioned a cash credit limit of Rs.50 lakhs as per Ext.A2 sanction letter dated 31.10.2006, which was countersigned by defendants 1 to 5 in token of having accepted the terms and conditions of the loan. These defendants have also executed the loan documents marked as Exts.A3 to A9 to secure the loan and hypothecation charge was created over ‘A’ schedule properties. Further, it could be seen that the 2nd defendant created equitable mortgage over ‘B’ schedule property by depositing Ext.A10 sale deed No.3117/2004 dated 28.05.2004 with the bank and executed letter dated 02.11.2006 marked as Ext.A9 confirming the deposit of Ext.A10 sale deed with the bank on 31.10.2006 towards security for the cash credit limit of Rs.50 lakhs granted to the 1st defendant firm.

11. The contesting defendants have not produced any material to rebut the claim of the applicant bank. Mere averment of the defendants that they never availed the subject loan nor executed the loan documents is unsustainable in absence of any material evidence. Further, they claimed that Annexures-A10 and A19 documents produced along with the OA are not executed by them and hence no liability can be fastened on them. But the said documents are not acknowledgement of debt as claimed by the defendants; whereas Annexure-A10 is sale deed No.3117/2004 dated 28.05.2004 marked Ext.A10 and Annexure-A19 is a copy of demand notice issued under S.13(2) of the SARFAESI Act to the 5th defendant. Further, it could be discerned from the judgment dated 12.12.2008 in W.P.(C) No.36678/2008 that defendants 1 and 2 have admitted before the Hon'ble High Court about the availing of the subject loan and they were permitted to repay the outstanding in installments. Hence, they cannot turn around and claim contrary in this proceeding.

12. The evidence adduced by the applicant bank would substantiate their claim made in this case. As on 31.03.2009, an amount of Rs.72,06,857.74 is outstanding in the cash credit account, which is clearly established from the account statements marked as Exts.A12 and A22. In the above backdrop, applicant bank is entitled to recover the said amount from the defendants and the issue is answered in favour of the applicant.

13. Considering the amount advanced, interest applied, repayments effected and default committed, I am of the view that the applicant bank is entitled to get pendente lite and post-decree interest @12% per annum, which is reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

14. The applicant bank, therefore, is entitled to get a final order on the following lines: In the result, the applicant bank is given a final order allowing it to recover:

(i) the sum of Rs.72,06,857.74 (Rupees seventy two lakhs six thousand eight hundred and fifty seven and Paise seventy four only) due under the cash credit account from defendants 1 and 3 to 5 jointly and severally and by sale of ‘A’ and ‘B' schedule properties and also from the assets, if any, inherited by additional defendants 6 and 7 from deceased 2nd defendant;

(ii) pendente lite and post-decree interest @12% per annum on the sum of Rs.72,06,857.74 (Rupees seventy two lakhs six thousand eight hundred and fifty seven and Paise seventy four only) from 01.04.2009 till realization from defendants 1 and 3 to 5 jointly and severally and by sale of ‘A’ and ‘B' schedule properties and also from the assets, if any, inherited by additional defendants 6 and 7 from deceased 2nd defendant; and

(iii) costs and expenses borne by it for realization of the loan from defendants 1 and 3 to 5.

15. ‘A’ and ‘B' schedules to the OA shall be appended to this final order.

16. The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

17. Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

18. Communicate copy of this order to both parties as provided in R.16 r/w R.2(c) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to my PA, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Tribunal on this the 18th day of August, 2026)

[SOVAN KUMAR DASH] PRESIDING OFFICER

A P P E N D I X Witness for Applicant: AW1: Sri.V.M.Sundareswaran, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. AW2: Sri.Rejeesh E., Chief Manager of the applicant bank. Witness for Defendant(s): Nil

Applicant’s Exhibits

Ext.No Date Particulars of documents

A1 26.10.2006 Loan application submitted by the defendants. A2 31.10.2006 Sanction letter issued by the applicant bank sanctioning cash credit limit of Rs.50 lakhs to the 1st defendant. A3 01.11.2006 Agreement of hypothecation of assets executed by defendants 1 to 5. A4 31.10.2006 Partnership letter, undertaking and declaration executed by the defendants. A5 … Consent letter executed by the defendants. A6 … Letter executed by the defendants. A7 … Letter of authority executed by the defendants. A8 01.11.2006 Common agreement executed by the defendants. A9 02.11.2006 Memorandum of deposit of title deeds executed by the 2nd defendant. A10 28.05.2004 Sale deed No.3117/2004 of Ernakulam SRO. A11 12.10.2007 Restructuring letter issued by the bank. A12 … Worksheet showing the unapplied interest under the cash credit account. A13 01.05.2006 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 11% to 11.50% per annum. A14 26.12.2006 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 11.50% to 11.75% per annum. A15 20.02.2007 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 11.75% to 12.50% per annum.

A16 11.04.2007 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 12.50% to 13.25% per annum. A17 14.07.2008 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 13.25% to 13.75% per annum. A18 11.08.2008 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 13.75% to 14% per annum. A19 06.11.2008 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 14% to 13.25% per annum. A20 12.01.2009 Copy of circular issued by the bank showing the revised PLR from 13.25% to 12.50% per annum. A21 18.09.2003 Copy of general power of attorney executed by the bank in favour of AW1. A22 … Copy of the statement of account pertaining to the cash credit facility.

Defendants’ Exhibits – Nil

PRESIDING OFFICER

PRESIDING OFFICER

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER

Dated the 18th August, 2026

TA No.1229/2016 (OA No.129/2009)

Between

Punjab National Bank, M.G.Road, Thiruvananthapuram. And

M/s.Best Buy Electronics & Home Appliances, Kaloor, Kochi & 6 others. …Defendants &

additional defendants

F I N A L O R D E R