Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Jasbir Kaur

DRT18 Mar 2024OA/185/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 RDB Act for recovery of dues. Relying on documentary evidence after the defendants failed to appear ex parte, the court approved the recovery certificate and directed the sale of mortgaged land and movable/immovable property to satisfy the debt and interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.46,98,797/- with interest @12% per annum allowed; recovery certificate issued; sale of mortgaged land and property of defendants directed.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Smt. Jasbir Kaur — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 185/2023 Date of Institution: 26.12.2022 Date of Decision: 18.03.2024

¶4

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited at SCO Nos.153-155, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Smt. Jasbir Kaur W/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh R/o House No.1383, Village Ugala, Tehsil Barara, District Ambala, Haryana

¶8

Sh. Harbhajan Singh S/o Sh. Mahima Singh R/o House No.1383, Village Ugala, Tehsil Barara, District Ambala, Haryana

¶9

Sh. Karnail Singh S/o Sh. Mahima Singh R/o House No.1383, Village Ugala, Tehsil Barara, District Ambala, Haryana

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Sh. Tejinder Singh proxy counsel for Sh. Sukhvinder Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶13

Defendants- ex parte

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.46,98,797/- with interest @12% per annum with half yearly rests from 26.12.2022.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.46,98,797/- with interest against Smt. Jasbir Kaur and others (defendants).

¶17

Bank’s case is that on 25.09.2014, it had granted a loan of Rs.35,00,000/- to defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the form of KCC Limit for agricultural purpose. Defendant No.3 stood as guarantor. To secure the loan, defendant No.2 had mortgaged his agricultural land measuring 72 Kanal 02 Marla (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @12.20% per annum. On 07.10.2022, a sum of Rs.46,98,797/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

¶19

On 01.02.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 06.09.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Munish Sharma, Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-16. 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.35,00,000/- and on 07.10.2022, a sum of Rs.46,98,797/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.46,98,797/- (Rupees Forty Six Lakh Ninety Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Seven Only) with interest @12% per annum with half yearly rests from 26.12.2022, 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 mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A) of the application as well as from 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 22.04.2024, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20AB) of the Act . 10. 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: 18.03.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh (Additional charge)

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Jasbir Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Jasbir Kaur

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vinod Kumar Chaturvedi

The Federal Bank Limited versus Sri. Johney @ John Chacko

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank versus Venkappa Bhimappa Lamani (Since deceased by his legal Representatives)

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Om Anand Enterprises

Atma Ram versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited

Narinder Singh versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited