Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Kimti Kumar and Others

DRT18 Sept 2025OA/1136/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's application under the RDB Act for recovery of ₹1.18 crore. It ordered the defendants to pay the principal amount with uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and issued a Recovery Certificate, authorizing enforcement via sale of hypothecated vehicles or attachment of personal assets under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay ₹1.18 crore with 8% simple interest; issuing Recovery Certificate for enforcement via sale of hypothecated assets or attachment of personal assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Kimti Kumar and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1136/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.04.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 18.09.2025

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, a Banking Company incorporated under the Companies Act and having its Regional Office at 27 BKC, C-27, G Block, Bandra Kurla complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051, and one of its Branch offices at SCO no. 153-154-155, Sector 9-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Kimti Kumar S/o Sh. Jit Raj, Address W.No. 17, Dhangu Road, Near Angoora Wala Bagh, Shakti Nagar Pathankot145001, Punjab, India.

¶10

Sh. Shiv Kumar S/o Sh. Kimti Kumar R/o W. No. 17, Nanu Nagar, Angoora Wala Bagh , Pathankot-145001.

¶11

Sh. Hari Chand S/o Sh. Arjan Dass Asija, Near Ram Bagh Gate, Mohalla Jania Wala, Faridkot, Punjab.

¶12

Sh. Varinder Kumar S/o Sh. Vishwas Mitter R/o W.No. 17, Friends Colony Behind Naag Mandir Pathankot Dhangu road, Pathankot-145001.

¶13

……….Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Manish Luthra, Advocate proxy for Sh. Iqbal Mohammed, Advocate for the applicant

¶16

Defendants already ex-parte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,18,08,898.36p (Rupees One Crore Eighteen Lacs Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Thirty Six Only). The Original Application has

¶19

¶20

OA NO. 1136/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. KIMTI KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶21

been filed through Sh. Nishant Mehta, Authorized Representative of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 04.03.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for grant of six Commercial Vehicles Loans for purchase of commercial vehicles, Overdraft Limit and a Working Capital Term Loan under GECL. Defendant nos. 2 to 4 stood as guarantors.

¶23

The applicant sanctioned vehicles loans of Rs.33,92,650.00 (Rs.27,92,650.00 for Vehicle and Rs. 6,00,000.00 for its body), Rs. 28,50,000.00 (Rs.22,00,000.00 for Vehicle and Rs. 6,50,000.00 for its body), Rs. 19,00,750.00, Rs. 19,00,750.00, Rs.15,75,750.00, Rs. 15,75,000.00. Loan cum Guarantee Agreements dated 31.03.2018, 05.01.2019, 21.08.2019 and 26.12.2019, which are Annexures A2, A6, A8, A9 and A11 to this OA. The applicant also sanctioned Overdraft Limit of Rs. 27,20,000.00 to defendants for running of business vide Overdraft Agreement dated 29.08.2018, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Thereafter, a Working Capital Term Loan of Rs. 24,39,800.00 was also sanctioned vide sanction letter dated 28.08.2020, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶24

Defendants had hypothecated their movable properties i.e. (i) Vehicle namely “TATA MOTORS CB TATA LPS 4923 TC FULLY BUILD TRAILER” bearing Registration no. PB04AA9733, Chasis No. MAT704108J2C06708 and Engine No. ISBE592304081C63678497.

¶25

(ii) Vehicle namely “TATA MOTORS CB TATA LPS 4018 CAB CHASIS TRAILER” bearing Registration no. PB04AB9533, Chasis No.

¶26

MAT447261J5K25896 and Engine No. 81J84824018.

¶27

¶28

OA NO. 1136/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. KIMTI KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶29

(iii) Vehicle namely “TATA MOTORS TATA 4018 TRACTOR TRAILER” bearing Registration no. PB04V9133, Chasis No. MAT447224G5E07988 and Engine No. 61D84302516. (iv) Vehicle namely “TATA MOTORS TATA 4018 TRACTOR TRAILER” bearing Registration no. PB04V6333, Chasis No. MAT447224G5C04692 and Engine No. 61C84291532.

¶30

(v) Vehicle namely “TATA MOTORS TATA 4018 TRACTOR TRAILER” bearing Registration no. PB04V8133, Chasis No. MAT447224GAH09173 and Engine No. 61G84327137. (vi) Vehicle namely “TATA MOTORS TATA 4018 TRACTOR TRAILER” bearing Registration no. PB04V8233, Chasis No. MAT44722A4GAH09165 and Engine No. 61HHH84328827. Documents executed: D.P. Notes dated 31.03.2018, 29.08.2018, 05.01.2019, 21.08.2019 and 26.12.2019 which are Annexures A3, A5, A7, A10 and A12 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement and Term Loan Agreement dated 28.08.2020, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Legal notice dated 10.01.2022, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Account Statements and Certificate under Bankers Book Evidence which are Annexures A16 to A26 to this OA. 5. The loans accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loans accounts there was a debit of Rs.1,18,08,898.36p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 04.09.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Nishant Mehta, Authorized Representative, Kotak Mahindra Bank h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶31

¶32

OA NO. 1136/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. KIMTI KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶33

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A26 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 1,18,08,898.36p (Rupees One Crore Eighteen Lacs Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Thirty Six Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶34

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @8.50%p.a, 9.21%p.a., 12.10% p.a., 12.00% p.a. in Vehicle Loans, and @13.26% p.a. in OD and Working Capital Term Loan, plus 2% penal interest from 11.01.2022 till the realization.

¶35

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all the loans accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶36

¶37

OA NO. 1136/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. KIMTI KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶38

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs. 1,18,08,898.36p (Rupees One Crore Eighteen Lacs Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Thirty Six Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated vehicles of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 09.10.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 18.09.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Kimti Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Kimti Kumar and Others

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 India versus Sh. Gursant Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Vinod Kumar Chawla and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Kashmir Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jagdev Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Pal Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Manpreet Singh and Others