Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Ghulam Mohammed Dar

DRT30 Jan 2025OA/259/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debts Recovery Tribunal order, the presiding officer allowed the bank's application for recovery of over Rs. 53 lakhs along with interest against joint and several defendants. The court approved the sale of mortgaged property and hypothecated vehicle to recover dues.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 53,65,894.14 with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale proceeds to be distributed by Recovery Officer.

Hdfc Bank versus Ghulam Mohammed Dar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 259 of 2022 Date of Institution: 12.01.2022 Date of Decision: 30.01.2025

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd., having branches all over India having a branch at Alamdar Road, Near Masjid Rahmania, District Chadura, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Ghulam Mohammed Dar s/o Mohammad Ismal Dar r/o 508, Charari Sharif Partly, Near Main Road, PO Charari Sharif, P.S. Charar Sharif, District Budgam Jammu & Kashmir.

¶8

Sajjad Ahmad Dar s/o Ghulam Mohammed Dar r/o 508, Charari Sharif Partly, Near Main Road, PO Charari Sharif, P.S. Charar Sharif, District Budgam Jammu & Kashmir.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Amit Rishi, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants – ex parte OA for the Recovery of Rs. 53,65,894.14p with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.01.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

HDFC 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. 53,65,894.14p with interest against Sh. Ghulam Mohammad Dar and another (Defendants).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 12.02.2016 it had granted KCC Limit of Rs. 25 lacs to the Defendants for agricultural purposes. At the request of the defendants, it had also granted vehicle loan of Rs.4,03,853 for purchase of vehicle. To secure the loan, Defendant no. 1 had mortgaged property and hypothecated vehicle Engine no. GULAFM897212, Chassis no.

¶15

¶16

MLA851CLGM397747 (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 29.10.2021, a sum of Rs. 53,65,894.14p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

On 29.04.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 19.01.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶18

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Jatinder Mishra, Assistant Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-22.

¶19

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 various credit facilities to the defendants and on 29.10.2021, a sum of Rs. 53,65,894.14p was due.

¶20

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs. 53,65,894.14p (Rupees Fifty Three Lacs Sixty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Four and Fourteen Paisa Only) with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.01.2022, 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 property and hypothecated vehicle, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶21

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶22

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶23

¶24

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 04.03.2025 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property and hypothecated vehicle 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: 30.01.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank v. Ghulam Mohammed Dar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Ghulam Mohammed Dar

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

Mani versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Shree Ganpati Logistics and Transport

Hdfc Bank Limited versus by Enterprises

ravinder kaur srivastava versus Icici Bank Limited

Shine P Jacob versus South Indian Bank

Canara Bank versus Ayam Studios Private Limited, Rep. by its Directors