Delhi District Court G.R.Gupta And Bros vs Punjab National Bank on 12 February, 2025 1 IN THE COURT OF SH. VIDYA PRAKASH DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)02, NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI CNR NO.: DLND010073992022 CS (COMM.)/750/2022 IN THE MATTER OF: 1. G. R. Gupta & Bros. Partnership Concern having its office at: Y8, Naraina Warehousing Area New Delhi 110 028 Through Its Partner Mr. Rajiv Gupta 2. Mr. Rajiv Gupta Son of Late Shri Ghasi Ram Gupta Y8, Naraina Warehousing Area New Delhi 110 028 ...PLAINTIFF VERSUS Punjab National Bank ABlock, Connaught Place New Delhi 110 001 ...DEFENDANT Date of Institution : 31082022 Date of reserving Judgment : 25012025 Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 12022025 JUDGMENT 1. Vide this judgment, I shall decide the present suit for recovery of Rs.47,10,984/ (Rupees Forty Seven Lacs Ten Thousand Nine Hundred & Eighty Four only) along with costs and interest @ 13% per annum w.e.f. 1992021 till realization of the amount, filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant bank. CS (Comm.)/750/2022 Page 1 of 54 2 FACTS OF THE CASE: 2. The case of the plaintiff as set up in the plaint, in nutshell, is as under: 2.1 The plaintiff no.1 is a partnership concern, which is registered with the Registrar of Firms and the plaintiff no.2 is its partner. 2.2 The defendant is a nationalized bank and is bound by the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act. 2.3 It is claimed that the plaintiffs had 35 years old long standing banking relationship with the defendant bank. 2.4 The plaintiffs had taken a credit facility from Oriental Bank of Commerce, which was, later on, merged into the defendant bank. The said credit facility was extended from time to time. The said credit facility was secured by mortgaging property bearing no. B3, Kalindi Colony, New Delhi 110065 and the papers of the said property were given to the defendant bank as collateral. The said credit facility was extended on 31.03.2020 by the defendant bank till 19.02.2021. Thereafter, the same was further extended twice for a periods of 3 months each till 19082021. 2.5 The lending interest rates across the Banks had been falling in the recent past, on account of which the CS (Comm.)/750/2022 Page 2 of 54 3 plaintiffs, from time to time, made requests to the defendant bank to lower the rate of interest, but in vain. The defendant bank continued to charge the same interest rate, whereas, other Banks were offering to charge at least 3% lower than the defendant bank. The higher interest paid by the plaintiffs, on account of such rate differential, accumulated to substantial monies, which, in business terms, actually tantamount to financial loss to the plaintiffs. 2.6 Despite plaintiffs' longstanding relationship with the defendant for 35 years, the defendant bank did not pay any heed to the requests of the plaintiffs. As such, the plaintiffs had no choice but to look for other alternatives since the facility was coming to an end on 19082021. 2.7 The plaintiff no. 2, vide letter and email dated 16.08.2021, informed the defendant bank that the said credit limits were expiring on 19082021 and that the plaintiffs, henceforth will not be renewing the banking facility with the defendant bank. It was informed by the plaintiffs that the limits would be shifted to Axis Bank and on receipt of remittance, the account may be settled. 2.8 The plaintiffs were shocked to receive the reply of the defendant bank, vide its email dated 19082021, CS (Comm.)/750/2022 Page 3 of 54 4 wherein the defendant appallingly stated that in