PUNJAB AND SIND BANK vs M/S. VISION TECH DISPLAY SOLUTION & ORS. on 3 November 2026

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 05.12.2019 through Ms. Haruinder Kaur, Senior Manager of the applicant bank, under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.38,76,434.04 together with cost, charEes and pendentellite and future interest @11.80o/o frorn date of filing of this O'A. till the realization in full.

- Defendants Ms. Chitra Malhotra, Counsel for applicant bank. Defendants are exparte, since, 08.01.2025.

2. The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 through defendant no.2, the applicant bank sanctioned a Cash Credit (Hypothecation) Limit Facility under CGTMSE Scheme of Rs.30,00,000/-, vide q TANO. 192of2024

sanction lefter dated 28.12.2016. The defendant no.3 stood as personal guarantor. The aforesaid facility was secured by the hypothecation of stock of containing electric goods i.e., monitor. T.V. etc. current assets, present and future, bills receivable and hypothecation of book debb. The defendants executed all necessary loaning documents on 28.L2.2016.

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 lefters, but there was no response from the defendants. Hence, the account was classified as NPA dated 31.03.2018. The applicant bank served a legal notice dated 05.04.2018 and 25.05.2019 to the defendants but failed to recover the same Thus, the present O.A.[I.A. is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues.

5. The applicant bank has filed evidence by way of affidavit of Ms. Harvinder Kaur, Senior Manager of the applicant bank as Annexure A-1 to Annexure A-21, 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. ta

4. On notice by this Tribunal, defendants failed to put appearance at all, despite publication. Accordingly, the defendants were proceeded against exparte on 08.01.202s.

TANO. 192of2024

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 to 3 to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs.38,76,434.04 along with cost, expenses and interest @11.80% 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 hypothecated assets. In case of short fall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of personal movable and immovable assets of the defendant nos.1 to

3.

3) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to Recovery Officer, DebtsRecovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi. e,\

TA NO. 192 of 2024

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) Parties are directed to appear before the Ld. Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on 04.0L.2027. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to records.

Date : 03.11.2026 !go\. (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi Date : 03.11.2026 This judgement has been signed, dated and pronounced in open court. -'-.-i-1 \ s (susHrl KUMAR nlSrOCr) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi t