BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-1, NEW DELHI

(OA NO.1000 OF 2024)

IN THE MATTER OF:
UNION BANK OF INDIA ….APPLICANT
V/S
M/S PDG TYRE INDIA PVT. LTD. & ORS. ….DEFENDANTS
INDEX
[Link]. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

1. LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

2. REPLY ON BEHALF OF THE ANSWERING

DEFENDANTS OF THE APPLICATION U/S 19 OF
THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS DUE TO BANKS
AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT FOR THE
RECOVERY OF RS.25,20,401-22 (Rs. TWENTY-
FIVE LACS TWENTY THOUSAND FOUR
HUNDRED ONE AND PAISA TWENTY-TWO
ONLY) ALONGWITH AFFIDAVIT.

3. CERTIFICATE U/S 63 BSA, 2023

4. LIST OF DOCUMENTS ALONGWITH

DOCUMENTS.

DELHI
DATED: 19/03/2025 DEFENDANTS NO.1 TO 4

THROUGH

COUNSEL
ADV. AYUSH MITTAL
Office at: G-23, Pacific North Mall,
Near City Park Hotel,
Pitampura, Delhi-34
Ph: 9818621176/9811350024
Email: [Link]@[Link]
 BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-1, NEW DELHI
(OA NO.1000 OF 2024)
IN THE MATTER OF:
UNION BANK OF INDIA ….APPLICANT
V/S
M/S PDG TYRE INDIA PVT. LTD. & ORS. ….DEFENDANTS

REPLY ON BEHALF OF THE ANSWERING DEFENDANTS OF THE

APPLICATION U/S 19 OF THE RECOVERY OF DEBTS DUE TO
BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT FOR THE RECOVERY
OF RS.25,20,401-22 (Rs. TWENTY-FIVE LACS TWENTY THOUSAND
FOUR HUNDRED ONE AND PAISA TWENTY-TWO ONLY).

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the applicant bank has not approached this Hon’ble tribunal with
clean hands and intentions as the original application filed by the
applicant bank for recovery of Rs.25,20,401-22 is concocted, baseless,
vague and is deliberately made confusing just to divert this Hon’ble
Tribunal. The Original Application filed by the applicant bank is full of
vague and baseless series of events and contentions, therefore defendant
deny each and every contentions of applicant bank in their original
application except the series of event which are either specifically
admitted by the applicant bank or which are matter of record.

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS AND SUBMISSIONS:

1. That the applicant bank has not filed any affidavit of section 63 BSA to
support the credibility of the Electronic evidentiary documents annexed
with their original application under the heading of list of documents.
2. That the applicant bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact
that the answering defendants have requested the applicant bank for
 renewal of cash credit limit on multiple occasions by physically visiting
the branch office on dated: 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024 and 23/12/2024 and
also requested through mail dated: 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024,
15/10/2024, 14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024. The copy of emails
dated 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024, 14/11/2024,
21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-
D1(COLLY).
3. That the applicant bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact
that the answering defendants have already submitted required documents
physically for renewal of cash credit limit to the applicant bank on
various dates i.e., 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024 and 23/12/2024 at the branch
of the applicant bank i.e., UNION BANK OF INDIA, Punjabi Bagh East
Branch, WZ-15, Manohar Park, New Rohtak Road, Punjabi Bagh East,
New Delhi-110026.
4. That the applicant bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact
that the answering defendants have already submitted required documents
for renewal of cash credit limit to the applicant bank through Email i.e.,
ubino572063@[Link], on various dates i.e., 26/08/2024
and 23/12/2024. The list of required documents submitted by the
answering defendant to the applicant bank for renewal of Cash credit
limit is reiterated below with annexures:

[Link]. Documents Annexures

1. Credit information report of [Link] ANNEXURE-D2
Gupta/D3
2. Credit information report of [Link] ANNEXURE-D3
Gupta/D2
3. List of documents submitted on the letter ANNEXURE-D4
head of Defendant no.1 for renewal of
 Cash Credit Limit.
4. Request letter for renewal of Cash Credit ANNEXURE-D5
Limit.
5. GST user id and password on defendant ANNEXURE-D6
no.1 on letter head
6. Bank Account Statement of Punjab ANNEXURE-D7
National Bank (PNB) of Defendant no.1 (COLLY)
from April 2023 to January 2024.
7. Bank Account Statement of State Bank ANNEXURE-D8
of India (SBI) of Defendant no.1 from (COLLY)
December 2023 to August 2024.
8. Bank Account Statement of Catholic ANNEXURE-D9
Syrian Bank Limited (CSB) of (COLLY)
Defendant no.1 from April 2022 to July
2024.
9. GSTR-1 for the period of April 2023 to ANNEXURE-D10
July 2024. (COLLY)
10. GSTR-3B for the period of April 2023 to ANNEXURE-D11
July 2024. (COLLY)
11. ITR with Computation for the Financial ANNEXURE-D12
Year 31/03/2021. (COLLY)
12. ITR with Computation and Balance sheet ANNEXURE-D13
for the Financial Year 31/03/2022. (COLLY)
13. Balance sheet for 31/03/2023 of ANNEXURE-D14
Defendant no.1 (COLLY)
14. List of Creditors as on 31/07/2024 of ANNEXURE-D15
Defendant no.1 (COLLY)
15. List of Debtors as on 31/07/2024 of ANNEXURE-D16
Defendant no.1 (COLLY)
 16. Stock statement as on 31/07/2024 of ANNEXURE-D17
Defendant no.1 (COLLY)

5. That it is very important to note that the applicant bank has not given any
receiving of the physical required documents received from the
answering defendants but the same fact of submission of required
documents is being admitted by the applicant bank in Para No.5.8 of their
application where the applicant bank has allegedly submitted that “….the
defendant filed the documents for renewal without bearing signatures of
the directors of the defendant no.1 which were not acceptable being
unsigned and on provisional basis.”. It is pertinent to mention herein that
the all the required documents submitted by the answering defendant
were duly signed by the directors. It is further very important to note that
if the applicant bank was having an objection regarding unsigned
documents, then they must have reported the same objection by
intimating the answering defendant through official letter or by the mail.
6. That it is also very important to note that the answering defendant have
send required documents through mail to the applicant bank on their
official email id i.e., ubino572063@[Link] and also send
carbon copy to [Link], Regional Officer of the applicant bank to his
email id: [Link]@[Link], on various dates i.e.,
26/08/2024 and 23/12/2024. Therefore, the alleged objection taken by the
applicant bank in Para no.5.8 could be rectified by the applicant bank
over the mail, but the applicant bank outrightly and deliberately ignored
the fact that the answering defendants have already submitted required
documents through mail.
7. That it is specifically submitted that the applicant bank have never replied
to the mails dated: 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024,
14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 of answering defendants even
 after acknowledging the same in the Para no.5.17 of the their application
where the applicant bank has allegedly submitted that “…..on 14/11/2024
the applicant bank emailed to the defendant no.4 in revert of his emails
dated 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024 & 14/11/2024”.
8. That it is also very important to note that the required documents duly
signed by the answering defendants for renewal of cash credit limit were
submitted to the branch manager of Punjabi Bagh East branch of the
Applicant Bank and the same documents were misplaced/lost by the
Branch Manager (the said fact was duly confirmed over WhatsApp of
defendant no.2). The applicant bank has deliberately hidden the aforesaid
fact to safeguard the branch manager and to hide the mistakes done by the
applicant bank and their employees. The copy of WhatsApp chat
conversed between the branch manager and the defendant no.2 is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE-D18 (COLLY).
9. That it is pertinent to mention herein that the answering defendant no.4
has also apprised regional officer i.e., Mr. Manish and credit manager of
the Punjabi bagh branch about the said facts and circumstances. Upon the
said apprisal both the aforementioned person gave assurances on behalf
of applicant bank that charges which are levied upon the answering
defendant would be waived off and Cash Credit Limit will be renewed.
The copy of WhatsApp chat conversed by regional officer i.e., Mr.
Manish and credit manager of the Punjabi bagh branch to defendant no.4
is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-D19 (COLLY).
[Link] it is specifically submitted that the answering defendant have also
requested for reversal of penal interest in the mails dated 12/09/2024,
21/09/2024, 15/10/2024, 14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 but the
applicant bank outrightly and deliberately ignored the request of the
answering defendants, also the applicant even did not revert back to the
request mails even after acknowledging the same in Para no.5.17 of the
 original application of the applicant bank. The list of penal interest
charged by the applicant bank is reiterated below:

Dated Amount of penal interest charged by the applicant

bank
31/07/2024 Rs.4307/-
31/08/2024 Rs.5032/-
30/09/2024 Rs.4865/-
31/10/2024 Rs.5052/-
[Link] it is specifically submitted that the defendant has also send an email
dated 25/12/2024 to the general manager of the applicant bank apprising
all the true facts and circumstances, but no revert came back from the end
of the applicant bank. Therefore, it is clearly evident from the conduct of
the applicant bank that they have failed in performing their duties towards
their customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is also submitted that
the original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed on non-
performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of law. It is very important
to note that due to non-performance of duties and deliberate ignorance of
the applicant bank, the account of answering defendant slipped into NPA.
The copy of email dated 25/12/2024 is annexed herewith as
ANNEXURE-D20 (COLLY).
[Link] the answering defendants prays to this Hon’ble Tribunal that the
original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed with heavy
cost.

REPLY OF THE PARTICULARS OF THE APPLICANT.

That the contents of the table under the heading of Particulars of the Applicant
of the Original Application is the matter of record, hence needs no reply.

REPLY OF THE PARTICULARS OF THE DEFENDANT.

That the contents of the table under the heading of Particulars of the Defendant
of the Original Application is the matter of record, hence needs no reply.

REPLY OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL.

That the contents of the table under the heading of Jurisdiction of the Tribunal
of the Original Application is the matter of record to the extent that this Hon’ble
Tribunal has territorial jurisdiction for trial of the current matter. It is also
submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are
reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents
of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same
are not repeated for the sake of brevity.

REPLY OF LIMITATION.

That the contents of the table under the heading of Limitation of the Original
Application is vague, false, baseless, and denied in toto. It is further submitted
that the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated
herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same
are not repeated for the sake of brevity.

PARA-WISE REPLY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE:-

1. That the contents of the Para no. 5.1 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is the matter of record, hence need no
reply.
2. That the contents of the Para no. 5.2 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is the matter of record to the extent that
the cash credit facility were sanctioned by Punjabi Bagh East branch and
the documents are executed at the said branch, rest of the content of the
para under reply is vague, false, baseless and denied. It is submitted that
the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated
 herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and
same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
3. That the contents of the Para no. 5.3 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is matter of record, hence need no reply.
4. That the contents of the Para no. 5.4 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is the matter of record except the fact that
the answering defendant approached the bank. It is submitted that area
wise survey canopy was set up by the applicant bank, wherein the
representatives of the bank visited door to door in the said area apprising
the residents about the CGTMSE scheme. It is specifically submitted that
the answering defendant has also availed loan facility from the applicant
bank in September 2019 which duly paid off in July 2022 without any
default and delay. Due to aforesaid facts the applicant bank insisted the
answering defendant to avail the said loan facility. It is further submitted
that the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are
reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The
contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and
parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
5. That the contents of the Para no. 5.5 and 5.6 under the heading of Facts of
the case of the original application is the matter of record to extent that
the on 06/07/2023 the credit facility was sanctioned, rest of the content of
the para under reply is vague, false, baseless and denied. It is submitted
that while executing credit facility agreement the employees of the
applicant bank took some signatures of the answering defendant no.2 and
3 on some blank papers, therefore, execution of the documents mentioned
in Para no.5.6 apart from simple agreement dated 07/07/2023 is not in the
knowledge of the answering defendants. In other words, the said
documents are made up documents on the black papers. It is further
 submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The
contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and
parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
6. That the contents of the Para no. 5.7 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is the matter of record to the extent that
the 07/09/2023 the applicant bank issued a letter to the defendant no.1 for
adjustment of overdue. It is submitted that the answering defendant have
already paid the said dues to the applicant bank. It is also submitted that
the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated
herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and
same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
7. That the contents of the Para no. 5.8 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is vague, false, baseless and denied except
the fact that on 01/06/2024 the defendant filed the documents for renewal.
It is submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and
Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the
aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of
brevity.
8. That the contents of the Para no. 5.9 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is vague, false, baseless and denied in
toto. It is submitted that as per the knowledge of the answering defendant,
no letter dated 06/07/2024 was ever received by the answering defendant.
It is also submitted that the applicant bank has not filed any certificate
U/s 63 BSA or any tracking report to support their contention. it is also
submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The
 contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and
parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
9. That the contents of the Para no. 5.10 and 5.11 under the heading of Facts
of the case of the original application is vague, false, baseless and denied
except the fact that defendant no.4 issued a letter dated 08/08/2024. It is
submitted that as per the knowledge of the answering defendant, no visit
on dated 01/08/2024 ever executed by any officer of the applicant bank. It
is also submitted that the applicant bank has not filed any certificate U/s
63 BSA to support their contention of digital document. Furthermore, the
said photograph does not contain any GPS location tags/watermarks. It is
very important to note that the said markings on the photographs clearly
evident to be recreated/morphed in order to condemn the letter dated
08/08/2024 given by the defendant no.4. It is also submitted that the
contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein
and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and
same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.12 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is vague, false, baseless and same are
denied except the fact that the applicant bank has issued a letter dated
12/08/2024 for renewal of credit limit. It is specifically submitted that the
applicant has not approached this Hon’ble Court with clean hands as the
applicant bank is deliberately avoiding/ignoring all the visits and mails
sent by the answering defendant alongwith required documents, on the
other hand the applicant bank is admitting receiving of the mails in para
no. 5.17. The content of the same is reiterated below:
“…..on 14/11/2024 the applicant bank emailed to the defendant
no.4 in revert of his emails dated 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024,
21/09/2024, 15/10/2024 & 14/11/2024”.
 It is also submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and
Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the
aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of
brevity.

[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.13 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is vague, false, baseless and denied in
toto. It is submitted that the annexed document does not pertains to
present case and to the answering defendant no.1 to 3. Whereas, the said
documents pertain to the personal and separate account of the answering
defendant no.4 which have no connection with the present cash credit
account of the applicant bank. It is specifically submitted that the
applicant bank is submitting concocted, baseless, vague story and is
deliberately alleging confusing submissions in their original application
just to divert this Hon’ble Tribunal from the true and real facts. It is also
submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The
contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and
parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.14 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is vague, false, baseless and denied in
toto. It is submitted that as per the knowledge of the answering defendant,
no letter dated 05/09/2024 and 09/10/2024 was ever received by the
answering defendant. It is also submitted that the applicant bank has not
filed any certificate U/s 63 BSA or any tracking report to support their
contention. it is also submitted that the contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as
reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and
 Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the
sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.15 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, baseless, false and
denied in toto. It is specifically submitted that the applicant has not
approached this Hon’ble Court with clean hands as the applicant bank is
deliberately avoiding/ignoring all the visits and mails sent by the
answering defendant alongwith required documents, on the other hand the
applicant bank is admitting receiving of the mails in para no. 5.17,
therefore, the question of bank calling the defendant no.4 and defendant
no.4 abusing over the call does not arise. Even otherwise, all the official
calls made by the banks are recorded for quality and training purposes,
still bank has chosen not to annexe any evidence on record to prove their
contention/submission. It is also submitted that the contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is
read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not
repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.16 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
denied in toto. It is submitted that as per the knowledge of the answering
defendant, no visit on dated 04/11/2024 ever executed by any officer of
the applicant bank. It is also submitted that the applicant bank has not
filed any certificate U/s 63 BSA to support their contention of digital
document. Furthermore, the said photograph does not contain any GPS
location tags/watermarks. It is very important to note that the said
markings on the photographs clearly evident to be recreated/morphed in
order to substantiate their concocted story as mentioned in para no.5.10 of
their original application. It is also submitted that the contents of
 Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is
read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not
repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.1 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied except the fact that on 14/11/2024 the applicant bank
emailed to the defendant no.4 in revert of his emails dated 26/08/2024,
12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024 & 14/11/2024. It is specifically
submitted that the applicant bank has specifically admitted the fact of
receiving mails and documents alongwith it. It is very important to note
that applicant bank have never acknowledge the receiving of the mails of
the answering defendant prior to this original application filed before this
Hon’ble Tribunal. It is further submitted that the contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as
reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and
Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the
sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.18 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied in toto. It is specifically submitted that the applicant
bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact that the answering
defendants have requested the applicant bank for renewal of cash credit
limit on multiple occasions by physically visiting the branch office on
dated: 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024 and 23/12/2024 and also requested
through mail dated: 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024,
14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 by submitting all the required
duly signed documents physically and through Email. It is clearly evident
from the conduct of the applicant bank that they have failed in performing
 their duties towards their customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is
also submitted that the original application of the applicant bank would
be dismissed on non-performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of
law. It is very important to note that due to non-performance of duties and
deliberate ignorance of the applicant bank, the account of answering
defendant slipped into NPA. It is also submitted that the contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is
read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not
repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.19 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied in toto. It is submitted that the conduct of the applicant
bank is clearly evident from the fore going paras that they have failed in
performing their duties towards their customer i.e., defendant in present
scenario substantiating the legal notice dated 15/11/2024. It is also
submitted that the original application of the applicant bank would be
dismissed on non-performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of law. It
is very important to note that due to non-performance of duties and
deliberate ignorance of the applicant bank, the account of answering
defendant slipped into NPA. It is also submitted that the contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is
read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not
repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.20 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied in toto. It is specifically submitted that the applicant
bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact that the answering
 defendants have requested the applicant bank for renewal of cash credit
limit on multiple occasions by physically visiting the branch office on
dated: 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024 and 23/12/2024 and also requested
through mail dated: 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024,
14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 by submitting all the required
duly signed documents physically and through Email. It is clearly evident
from the conduct of the applicant bank that they have failed in performing
their duties towards their customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is
also submitted that the original application of the applicant bank would
be dismissed on non-performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of
law. It is very important to note that due to non-performance of duties and
deliberate ignorance of the applicant bank, the account of answering
defendant slipped into NPA. It is also submitted that the contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is
read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not
repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.21 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied in toto. It is submitted that the contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions and legal notice dated 15/11/2024 are
reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid para. The
contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions and legal notice
dated 15/11/2024 are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated
for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.22 under the heading of Facts of the
case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied in toto. It is specifically submitted that the applicant
bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact that the answering
 defendants have requested the applicant bank for renewal of cash credit
limit on multiple occasions by physically visiting the branch office on
dated: 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024 and 23/12/2024 and also requested
through mail dated: 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024,
14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 by submitting all the required
duly signed documents physically and through Email. Therefore, the legal
notice dated 27/11/2024 is completely vague, false and concocted in a
very cold and calculated manner. It is clearly evident from the conduct of
the applicant bank that they have failed in performing their duties towards
their customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is also submitted that
the original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed on non-
performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of law. It is very important
to note that due to non-performance of duties and deliberate ignorance of
the applicant bank, the account of answering defendant slipped into NPA.
It is also submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and
Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the
aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of
brevity.
[Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.23 to 5.26 under the heading of Facts
of the case of the original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless
and same are denied in toto. It is also submitted that the contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated herein and same is
read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary
Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and same are not
repeated for the sake of brevity.

PARA-WISE REPLY OF CAUSE OF ACTION.

 [Link] the contents of the Para no. 5.27 under the heading of Cause of
Action of the Original application is concocted, vague, false, baseless and
same are denied in toto. It is specifically submitted that the applicant
bank has outrightly and deliberately ignored the fact that the answering
defendants have requested the applicant bank for renewal of cash credit
limit on multiple occasions by physically visiting the branch office on
dated: 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024 and 23/12/2024 and also requested
through mail dated: 26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, 21/09/2024, 15/10/2024,
14/11/2024, 21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024 by submitting all the required
duly signed documents physically and through Email. Therefore, the legal
notice dated 27/11/2024 is completely vague, false and concocted in a
very cold and calculated manner. It is clearly evident from the conduct of
the applicant bank that they have failed in performing their duties towards
their customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is also submitted that
the original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed on non-
performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of law. It is very important
to note that due to non-performance of duties and deliberate ignorance of
the applicant bank, the account of answering defendant slipped into NPA.
It is also submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and
Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the
aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of
brevity.

PARA-WISE REPLY OF RELIEF(S) SOUGHT FOR.

[Link] the contents of the Para no.6 (a) to (b) under the heading of Relief(s)
sought for of the original application are concocted, vague, false, baseless
and denied in toto. It is submitted that the applicant bank has not
approached this Hon’ble tribunal with clean hands and intentions as the
 original application filed by the applicant bank for recovery of
Rs.25,20,401-22 is concocted, baseless, vague and is deliberately made
confusing just to divert this Hon’ble Tribunal. The Original Application
filed by the applicant bank is full of vague and baseless series of events
and contentions, therefore defendant deny each and every contentions of
applicant bank in their original application except the series of event
which are either specifically admitted by the applicant bank or which are
matter of record. It is clearly evident from the conduct of the applicant
bank that they have failed in performing their duties towards their
customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is also submitted that the
original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed on non-
performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of law. It is very important
to note that due to non-performance of duties and deliberate ignorance of
the applicant bank, the account of answering defendant slipped into NPA.
That the answering defendants prays to this Hon’ble Tribunal that the
original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed with heavy
cost. Therefore, the answering defendant reserves their rights to claim
compensation from the applicant bank according to the provisions of law.
It is also submitted that the contents of Preliminary Objections and
Submissions are reiterated herein and same is read as reply of the
aforesaid paras. The contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions
are read as part and parcel and same are not repeated for the sake of
brevity.

PARA-WISE REPLY OF INTERIM ORDERS, IF PRAYED FOR.

[Link] the contents of the Para no.7 (a) to (g) under the heading of Interim
Orders, If Prayed For of the original application are concocted, vague,
false, baseless and denied in toto. It is submitted that the applicant bank
has not approached this Hon’ble tribunal with clean hands and intentions
 as the original application filed by the applicant bank for recovery of
Rs.25,20,401-22 is concocted, baseless, vague and is deliberately made
confusing just to divert this Hon’ble Tribunal. The Original Application
filed by the applicant bank is full of vague and baseless series of events
and contentions, therefore defendant deny each and every contentions of
applicant bank in their original application except the series of event
which are either specifically admitted by the applicant bank or which are
matter of record. It is clearly evident from the conduct of the applicant
bank that they have failed in performing their duties towards their
customer i.e., defendant in present scenario. It is also submitted that the
original application of the applicant bank would be dismissed on non-
performance of duty and deliberate ignorance of law. It is very important
to note that due to non-performance of duties and deliberate ignorance of
the applicant bank, the account of answering defendant slipped into NPA.
That the answering defendants prays to this Hon’ble Tribunal that the
original application of the applicant bank have no cause of action upon
which interim relief must be granted, therefore, the answering defendants
prays to this Hon’ble Tribunal that the original application of the
applicant bank would be dismissed with heavy cost. Therefore, the
answering defendant reserves their rights to claim compensation from the
applicant bank according to the provisions of law. It is also submitted that
the contents of Preliminary Objections and Submissions are reiterated
herein and same is read as reply of the aforesaid paras. The contents of
Preliminary Objections and Submissions are read as part and parcel and
same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.
[Link] the contents of unnumbered para under the heading of Interim
Orders, If Prayed For of the original application are concocted, vague,
false, baseless and denied in toto. It is specifically submitted that the
applicant bank have no prima facie in this present case as the applicant
 bank has not approached this Hon’ble tribunal with clean hands and
intentions as the original application filed by the applicant bank for
recovery of Rs.25,20,401-22 is concocted, baseless, vague and is
deliberately made confusing just to divert this Hon’ble Tribunal,
therefore, the applicant bank has admitted the facts on record.
[Link] the contents of Para no.8 to 11 under reply are matter of record,
hence need no reply.

PRAYER:

It is humbly prayed to this Hon’ble Tribunal that this Hon’ble may

dismiss the original application of the applicant bank with heavy cost as the
applicant bank has not approached this Hon’ble tribunal with clean hands and
intentions as the original application filed by the applicant bank for recovery of
Rs.25,20,401-22 is concocted, baseless, vague and is deliberately made
confusing just to divert this Hon’ble Tribunal,

Also, it is further prayed to this Hon’ble Tribunal may award

compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of answering defendant and against the
applicant bank, and,

Any other relief(s) may be granted in favour of defendants and against the
applicant bank in the interest of justice.

DELHI

DATED: 19/03/2025 DEFENDANTS NO.1

DEFENDANTS NO.2
 DEFENDANTS NO.3

DEFENDANTS NO.4

THROUGH

COUNSEL
ADV. AYUSH MITTAL
Office at: G-23, Pacific North Mall,
Near City Park Hotel,
Pitampura, Delhi-34
Ph: 9818621176/9811350024
Email: [Link]@[Link]

VERIFICATION:

Verified at Delhi on this day of March, 2025 that the contents of the
Preliminary objections and Submission from para no. 1 to 12 are based upon the
legal information’s believed to be true, whereas, the contents of Para-Wise
Reply of facts of the case from para no. 1 to 26 are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge, while last para is Prayer before this Hon'ble Court.

DEFENDANTS NO.1

DEFENDANTS NO.2

DEFENDANTS NO.3

DEFENDANTS NO.4
 BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-1, NEW DELHI
(OA NO.1000 OF 2024)
IN THE MATTER OF:
UNION BANK OF INDIA ….APPLICANT
V/S
M/S PDG TYRE INDIA PVT. LTD. & ORS. ….DEFENDANTS

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

[Link]. Documents Annexures Page

No.
1. The Copy of emails dated ANNEXURE-D1
26/08/2024, 12/09/2024, (COLLY)
21/09/2024, 15/10/2024, 14/11/2024,
21/12/2024 and 23/12/2024.
2. Credit information report of ANNEXURE-D2
[Link] Gupta/D3.

3. Credit information report of ANNEXURE-D3

[Link] Gupta/D2.

4. List of documents submitted on the ANNEXURE-D4

letter head of Defendant no.1 for
renewal of Cash Credit Limit.

5. Request letter for renewal of Cash ANNEXURE-D5

Credit Limit.

6. GST user id and password on ANNEXURE-D6

defendant no.1 on letter head

7. Bank Account Statement of Punjab ANNEXURE-D7

National Bank (PNB) of Defendant
(COLLY)
no.1 from April 2023 to January
2024.

8. Bank Account Statement of State ANNEXURE-D8

 Bank of India (SBI) of Defendant (COLLY)
no.1 from December 2023 to August
2024.

9. Bank Account Statement of Catholic ANNEXURE-D9

Syrian Bank Limited (CSB) of
(COLLY)
Defendant no.1 from April 2022 to
July 2024.

10. GSTR-1 for the period of April 2023 ANNEXURE-D10

to July 2024.
(COLLY)
11. GSTR-3B for the period of April ANNEXURE-D11
2023 to July 2024.
(COLLY)
12. ITR with Computation for the ANNEXURE-D12
Financial Year 31/03/2021.
(COLLY)
13. ITR with Computation and Balance ANNEXURE-D13
sheet for the Financial Year
(COLLY)
31/03/2022.

14. Balance sheet for 31/03/2023 of ANNEXURE-D14

Defendant no.1
(COLLY)
15. List of Creditors as on 31/07/2024 of ANNEXURE-D15
Defendant no.1
(COLLY)
16. List of Debtors as on 31/07/2024 of ANNEXURE-D16
Defendant no.1
(COLLY)
17. Stock statement as on 31/07/2024 of ANNEXURE-D17
Defendant no.1
(COLLY)
18. Copy of WhatsApp chat conversed ANNEXURE-D18
between the branch manager and the
(COLLY)
defendant no.2.

19. Copy of WhatsApp chat conversed ANNEXURE-D19

by regional officer i.e., Mr. Manish
(COLLY).
and credit manager of the Punjabi
bagh branch to defendant no.4.
 20. Copy of email dated 25/12/2024. ANNEXURE-D20
(COLLY).

DELHI

DATED: 19/03/2025 DEFENDANTS NO.1 TO 4

THROUGH

COUNSEL
ADV. AYUSH MITTAL
Office at: G-23, Pacific North Mall,
Near City Park Hotel,
Pitampura, Delhi-34
Ph: 9818621176/9811350024
Email: [Link]@[Link]