Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Arafat Ahmed

DRT28 Aug 2024OA/1710/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an application filed by the Jammu And Kashmir Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues under Section 19 of the RDB Act. The bank established the loan amount and outstanding due. The Tribunal accepted the bank's version of facts and allowed the application.

What did the court decide?

Application for recovery of Rs.22,73,190/- with interest allowed with costs; Recovery Certificate issued; Liability held joint and several.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Arafat Ahmed — Specific Performance | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1710 of 2022 Date of Institution: 16.08.2022 Date of Decision: 28.08.2024

¶4

The Jammu And Kashmir Bank Ltd., having its Registered Head Office at: Corporate Head Quarter M.A. Road, Srinagar-190001 and having its branch office at: Doda Main Jammu & Kashmir

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Arafat Ahmed S/o Mohd. Aslam, R/o Buland Pur, Doda Jammu and Kashmir-182143 Also at:- Arafat Ahmed S/o Mohd. Aslam Lecturer, Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Bharath, Doda, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶8

Irshad Ahmed S/o Mohd. Aslam, R/o Buland Pur, Doda, Jammu and Kashmir-182143

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Amit Rishi, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Sh. Arafat Ahmed, defendant no.1 in person and also appeared on behalf of defendant no.2 ( Though Ex-parte vide order dated 06.11.2023).

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,73,190/- with interest @11% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 16.08.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Jammu And Kashmir Bank Ltd., (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.22,73,190/- with interest against Arafat Ahmed And Another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 05.10.2020, it had granted Personal Consumption Loan under Saral Sohuliat Loan Scheme of Rs.19.65 lacs to defendant no.1. Defendant no.2 stood as guarantor vide executed deed of guarantee dated 05.10.2010 (Exhibit A-7). The loan was chargeable

¶17

¶18

to interest @11% per annum with monthly rests. On 30.06.2022, a sum of Rs.22,73,190/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 02.09.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 06.11.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Umesh Sharma, Authorized Representative along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-9. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.19.65 lacs and on 30.06.2022, a sum of Rs.22,73,190/-was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.22,73,190/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Three Thousand One Hundred Ninety Only) with interest @11% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 16.08.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 30.09.2024.

¶21

¶22

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 28.08.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Arafat Ahmed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Arafat Ahmed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suniil Rangnath Kale versus Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited

Union Bank of India versus M/S Magnifico Megacity LLP

Shachn Tea Factory versus Central Bank of India

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus M/S Hafifa Nasari Chemicals

Canara Bank versus Gaurav Maheshwari

Punjab National Bank versus Poonam@Poonamgulati