BANK OF BARODA vs MR EXPERTO VISION on 23 October 2026

FINAL ORDER

This ol'iginal application has been filed by the applicant batrk, on 17.07.2079 through Mr. Vipin Kumar, Senior Manager of the applicant bank, under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.30,68,729.71 together with cost, charges and pendentellite and future interest @12.55olo from date of filing of tliis O.A. till the realization in full.

2. The brief facts of the case are that at the request of deiendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no'2, The applicant. bank sanctioned a Cash Credit Facility of Rs.20,00,0001-, vide sanction letter dated 16.05.2016' The defendants executed all necessary loaning eI, TANO. 1076of2024 2 documents on 17.05.2016. Again, at the request of defendants, the applicant bank sanctioned a Term Loan Facility of Rs.10,00,000/-, vide sanction letter dated 09.09.2016. The defendants executed all necessary loaning documents on 09.09.2016.

3. It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facilities, but failed to maintain the financial discipline and failed to repay the due amounts. The applicant bank requested the defendants to regularize the loan account by visits and letters, but there was no response from the defendants. Hence, the account was classified as NPA dated 11.11.2017. The applicant bank served a legal notice dated 09.03.2019 to the defendants but failed to recover the same Thus, the present O.A.ff.A. is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues.

4. On notice by this Tribunal, defendants failed to put appearance at all, despite publication. Accordingly, the defendants were proceeded against expafte on 27.02.2025. t

5. The applicant bank has filed evidence by way of affidavit of Mr. Vipin Kumar, Senior Manager of the applicant bank as Annexure A-1 to Annexure A-22, which have gone unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, the case of the applicant stands fully established against the defendants with respect to nonpayment of outstanding amount. 9A

TANO.1076of2024 3

6. After perusing the records, this Tribunal is of the view that the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts. The evidence and documents filed by the applicant bank not rebutted by the defendants by not placing any evidence and there is no question of disbelieving the evidence and documents filed by the applicant bank based upon the written/printed documents. In the light of the above discussions, the present T.A. deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

1) I hereby allow this T.A. of the applicant bank and direct the defendant nos.1 and 2 to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs.30,68,729.71 along with cost, expenses and interest @9.600lo from the date of filing of this O.A. which has become T.A till the date of realization.

2) In case of failure to deposit the above amount within the stipulated period, the same shall be recovered from the sale of personal movable and immovable assets of the defendant nos.1 and 2.

3) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi. CI

TANO. 1076of2024 4

4) The registry of this Tribunal is hereby directed to issue free copy of the order and send the same to both the parties.

5) Pafties are directed to appear before the Ld. Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on 23.12.2026. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to records. s). Date : 23.10.2026 (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi This judgement has been signed, dated and pronounced in open court. Date : 23.10.2026 (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi L t\