UCO BANK vs Kanai Saha on 29 October 2026

J U D G M E N T

1. This is an application under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, filed by the applicant bank against the sole defendant seeking issuance of Certificate of Recovery for realization of a sum of Rs.19,36,388.00 (Rupees Nineteen Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Eight) only with interest calculated upto 31.10.2017 and further interest from 01.11.2017 @10.20% per annum with monthly rests till realization of the entire amount along with injunction restraining the defendant from disposing of and/or alienating and/or encumbering the personal charged and uncharged assets and also costs.

2. The facts in brief, giving rise to the present application as pleaded are that considering the loan application dated 26.12.2013 of the defendant, the applicant bank sanctioned a Commercial Vehicle Loan facility to the extent and/or limit of Rs. 24,95,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Ninety Five Thousand) only. The defendant on 26.12.2013 executed Demand Promissory Note, Notice of Undertaking and Advance to Road Transport Operators. Thereafter the Defendant executed the Revival Letter on 03.10.2016. The Applicant Bank on or about 18.10.2017 served the Notices upon the Defendant and issued the demand notice upon the borrower on 01.11.2017. After giving credits for all RAKESH PATI TIWARI

RAKESH PATI TIWARI Date: 2026.10.30 12:35:39 +05'30'

(Contd…)

sums of moneys paid by and/or realized on behalf of the defendant a sum of Rs.19,36,388.00 (Rupees Nineteen Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Eight) only with interest calculated upto 31.10.2017 was due against the defendant.

3. Despite the service of summons upon the defendant through speed post, the defendant failed to appear before this Tribunal. Hence, the matter is proceeding ex- parte against the defendant, vide order dated 06.08.2026.

4. The Applicant Bank in support of its case has filed evidence by way of affidavit as affirmed by Sri Walesh Mohammad Shaik, the Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank and also relied upon the following documents:- Sl. No. Name of the documents Exhibit No.

1. Application dated 26.12.2013 A

2. Sanction letter dated 26.12.2013 A-1

3. Demand Promissory note for Rs. 24,95,000.00 dated 26.12.2013 A-2

4. Notice of Undertaking dated 26.12.2013 A-3

5. Advance to Road Transport Operators dated 26.12.2013 A-4

6. valuation of the hypothecated vehicle A-5

7. Balance Confirmation Letter dated 04.10.2016 A-6

8. Notices Served by Branch Manager dated 18.10.2017 and 01.11.2017 A-7

9. Statement of Bank Accounts A-8

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant bank and perused the documents and evidence adduced by the applicant bank. The applicant bank has adduced documentary evidences which are marked as Exhibits ‘A’, ‘A-1’ to ‘A-8’. The sanction of loan has been proved by producing Sanction letter dated 26.12.2013 (Exhibit ‘A-1’), the execution of required documents like Demand Promissory Note, Notice of Undertaking, Advance to Road Transport Operators and Balance Confirmation Letter etc. have been proved by exhibiting the same at ‘A-2’ to ‘A-4’ and ‘A-6’ respectively. By filing the Statement of Account (Exhibit-‘A-8’), the applicant bank has proved the total outstanding dues along with interest upto 31.10.2017 to the tune of Rs.19,36,388.00 (Rupees Nineteen Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Eight) only against the defendant. RAKESH PATI TIWARI Digitally signed by RAKESH PATI TIWARI

12:35:49 +05'30'

(Contd…)

6. Taking into account of the execution of Revival Letter on 04.10.2016 by the defendant, the limitation available is for 3 (three) years and as such the claim of the applicant bank is within limitation.

7. The applicant bank has got valid cause of action to file this case as after taking the loan the defendant failed to make payment as per the terms and conditions of the sanction letter agreed by the defendant.

8. There is nothing available on the record to contradict the version of the applicant bank as the ex-parte hearing has been made in this case. Thus the applicant bank has sufficiently proved its case by exhibiting all relevant documents. In the above circumstances, following order is passed ;

O R D E R

(i) T.O.A. No. 35/2026 arising out of O.A. No. 403 of 2017 filed by the applicant bank is allowed against the sole defendant and it is hereby ordered that the applicant bank is entitled to recover the total dues debt amount for Rs.19,36,388.00 (Rupees Nineteen Lacs Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Eight) only with interest calculated upto 31.10.2017 and further interest thereon @10.20% p.a. with monthly rests from 01.11.2017 till realization of entire balance from the defendant along with the cost amount.

(ii) Amount, if any, paid by the defendant in the loan account or amount recovered by the applicant bank, if any, made towards the loan accounts after filing of the O.A be taken into account while arriving at the exact amount of outstanding payable by the defendant.

(iii) The hypothecated Vehicle being Registration No. - WB 53B 3585, Year of Manufacture – 2013, Manufacturer’s Name - M/S. Ashoke Layland Ltd., Type - Dumper Chassis No. - MB4HTLYCXDPXH5935, Engine No. – DXPZ1110078, as mentioned in the original application, shall remain charged to the applicant bank and the applicant bank shall have paramount charge thereon.

(iv) The defendant is debarred from transferring; alienating, encumbering or disposing of the hypothecated/mortgaged properties or any other property and assets RAKESH PATI TIWARI Digitally signed by RAKESH PATI TIWARI

12:35:58 +05'30'

(Contd…)

belonging to the defendant till the aforesaid adjudicated debt amount is recovered from the defendant.

(v) The defendant is given a time of thirty days from the date of this judgment for repayment of the above decreed debt amount with interest failing which the applicant bank is entitled to recover its dues by sale of the hypothecated/mortgaged property as aforesaid and is also entitled to proceed against the said defendant personally and/or personal properties to recover the dues in accordance with law.

(vi) Let the certificate of Recovery be drawn up by the Learned Registrar forthwith in terms of judgment for issuance of the same against the defendant in favour of applicant bank under Sub-Section 22 of Section-19 of The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993and put up the same for signature and issuance.

(vii) Learned Recovery Officer is directed to realize the dues amount from the defendant as per the Recovery Certificate in accordance with law.

(viii) Let this judgment be uploaded on website of the tribunal and the Registry is directed to serve/send copy of this judgment to the parties free of cost.

(ix) Record is consigned to the record room along with the judgment.

The judgment is signed and pronounced in the open Tribunal on 29th day of October, 2026.

(RAKESH PATI TIWARI) Presiding Officer DRT, Siliguri.

RAKESH PATI TIWARI

RAKESH PATI TIWARI Date: 2026.10.30 12:36:09 +05'30'