Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay, (Erstwhile M/S Aijaz Brick Kiln)

DRT21 Nov 2025OA/2200/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues. The court found in favor of the plaintiff bank due to insufficient evidence from the defendants to prove otherwise.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.57,75,242.11 with interest and Rs.1,13,424 with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; proceedings against defendants disposed of ex parte.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Aijaz… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2200/2022 Date of Institution: 30.06.2022 Date of Decision: 21.11.2025

¶4

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Humhama Near Jamia Masjid, Budgam, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

M/s Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay, (erstwhile M/s Aijaz Brick Kiln) a sole proprietorship concern situated at Ichgam, Budgam Jammu and Kashmir, through its proprietor Sh. Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay s/o Sh. Mohammad Anwar Kuchay.

¶7

Sh. Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay s/o Sh. Mohammad Anwar Kuchay, r/o AI-Kareem Colony Humhama, Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶8

Sh. Mohammad Anwar Kuchay s/o Sh. Abdul Salam Kuchay, since deceased and now represented by his legal heirs: -

¶9

a.) Sh. Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay s/o Sh. Mohammad Anwar Kuchay, r/o Al-Kareem Colony Humhama, Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶10

b.) Sh. Ishfaq Ahmad Kuchay s/o Mohammad Anwar Kuchay, r/o Al-Kareem Colony Humhama, Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶11

c.) Ms. Roohi w/o Mr. Fayaz Ahmad Malik, r/o Sumerbugh, Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir. (Daughter)

¶12

d.) Mrs. Gousia w/o Fayaz Ahmd Dar, r/o Peerbagh, Hyderpora, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir.(Daughter)

¶13

Sh. Ishfaq Ahmad Kuchay @Ashfaq Ahmad Kuchay s/o Sh. Mohammad Anwar Kuchay, r/o Humhama, Budgam, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶14

Sh. Fayaz Ahmad Malik s/o Sh. Ghulam Mohammad Malik, r/o Sumerbugh Lasjan, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶15

……….Defendants

¶16

Advocates

¶17

Sh. Sumit Batra, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 17.09.2025 .

¶18

OA for the Recovery of Rs.58,88,666.11p with interest from 30.06.2022.

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Jammu & Kashmir Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.58,88,666.11p with interest against M/s Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay and others (defendants).

¶22

Bank’s case is that on 17.06.2011, it had granted a loan of Rs.8.50Lacs to defendant nos. 1 and 2 in the form of C.C Limit for Business purpose. On 15.04.2013, at the request of defendants, bank enhanced the existing C.C. Limit from Rs.8.50 Lacs to Rs.30.00 Lacs. The C.C. limit was renewed on 01.09.2014 for Rs30.00Lacs. In the year 2016, Considering the request of the defendants, applicant bank granted restructuring/rehabilitation of their existing limits and granted W.C.D.L. of Rs.6.00 Lacs (under Rehabilitation Package for Borrower affected by Disturbance of 2016) in addition to their existing C.C. Limit of Rs.30.00Lacs. On 25.06.2018, the limit were renewed for Rs.30.00Lacs and Rs.6.00Lacs respectively. On 24.04.2019, the bank granted an Adhoc Limit of Rs.6.50Lacs to the defendants. To secure all the loans, Defendant No.3 had mortgaged his properties (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant Nos. 3 to 5 stood guarantors for the facilities. Defendant no.3 is deceased and now represented through his legal heirs. The loans were chargeable at different rates of interest. On 31.05.2022, a sum of Rs.58,88,666.11p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application. 3. On 11.01.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 17.09.2025, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶23

¶24

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Umesh Sharma, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-45. 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 loans under various schemes and on 31.05.2022, a sum of Rs.58,88,666.11p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.58,88,666.11p (Rupees Fifty Eight Lacs Eighty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Eleven Only) i.e. Rs.57,75,242.11p in C.C. Limit with interest @10.85% p.a. and Rs.1,13,424/- with interest @9.50% p.a. (both facilities) with monthly rests from 30.06.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of legal heirs of defendant No.3 would be limited upto the extent of the property inherited by them from Sh. Mohammad Anwar Kuchay, whereas the liability of defendant Nos. 1, 2 4 and 5 would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged properties fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 29.12.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and hypothecated assets as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) 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: 21.11.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay, (Erstwhile M/S Aijaz Brick Kiln)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay, (Erstwhile M/S Aijaz Brick Kiln)

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

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S M M Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M/S Era Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Lakhvir Singh

M/S Jaspal Singh and Sons versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

Sri Sailesh Shrestha versus State Bank of India

Ms Khan Enterprise Proprietor MD Sabir Ahmed versus Icici Bank Limited