Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Chanan Singh and Others

DRT22 Oct 2025OA/129/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank against three respondents for recovery of an outstanding loan of Rs. 52,52,893.42. The Tribunal declared the respondents jointly and severally liable and awarded simple interest at 8% per annum, ordering a Recovery Certificate be issued.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Respondents declared liable to pay Rs. 52,52,893.42 plus simple interest @8% p.a.; entitlement to sale of hypothecated properties.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Chanan Singh and Others — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.129/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.01.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.10.2025

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. (a body corporate, constituted under the Banking Regulations Act, 1949) having its Head Office at 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 and its Branch Office at Kotak Mahindra Bank, Namdev Chowk, Jalandhar-144001 & Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Landran Road, Khasra No. 678, Sohana, Mohali, SAS Nagar-140308 through its Authorized Representative Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Landran Road, Khasra No. 678, Sohana, Mohali-140308.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Chanan Singh S/o Sh. Hardev Singh R/o House No. 4, Village Dharam Singh Wala, Tehsil Dharamkot & District Moga- 142043.

¶10

Sh. Niranjan Singh S/o Sh. Hardev Singh R/o House No. 82, Village Dharam Singh Wala, Tehsil Dharamkot & District Moga142043.

¶11

Sh. Aniljit Kamboj S/o Sh. Satpal Kamboj R/o House No. 25, Village Kot Ise Khan, Tehsil Dharamkot & District Moga-142043.

¶12

………. Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Rehan Chaudhary, Advocate for the applicant (through VC)

¶15

Defendants are ex-parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 52,52,893.42p (Rupees Fifty

¶18

¶19

OA NO. 129/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. CHANAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶20

Two Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Three and Paise Forty Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Resolution dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 had approached the applicant for grant of CC Limit of Rs. 62.00 Lacs vide loan application 12.06.2015. Defendant no.3 stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs. 49.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 22.07.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant nos. 1 & 2 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. land measuring 99K-05M (12 Acre 3 Kanal 5 Marle) situated at village Dharam Singh Wala, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Punjab vide declaration u/s 4(1) dated 31.08.2015 and Letter to Sub Registrar dated 31.08.2015 for creation of charge which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Documents executed:- Hypothecation Agreement and Guarantee Deed both dated 29.07.2015, which are Annexures A3 & A4 to this OA; Legal notice dated 11.11.2024 along with postal receipts which are Annexure A6 to this OA and Statement of account which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶22

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs. 52,52,893.42p, 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 16.10.2025.

¶23

¶24

OA NO. 129/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. CHANAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank h as been filed. 8. Heard ex parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

It was argued by learned counsel through Video Conferencing 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 A7 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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 loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 52,52,893.42p (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Three and Paise Forty Two Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶27

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.45%p.a. with 2% penal interest from 23.11.2024 till the realization.

¶28

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 mortgaged property, 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

¶29

¶30

OA NO. 129/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS SH. CHANAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶31

the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs. 52,52,893.42p (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Three and Paise Forty Two Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account 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/mortgaged properties 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.

¶33

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 01.11.2025.

¶36

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.

¶37

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶38

Dated: 22.10.2025

¶39

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶40

Presiding Officer,

¶41

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Chanan Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Chanan Singh 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Randhir Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjit Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Aps International and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Baljinder Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Prem Singh and Another