The Tribunal, hearing an O.A. under S. 19(d) of RDB Act, 1993, allowed the bank's claim for outstanding dues and interest against absent defendants.
Recovery Certificate for Rs. 1,47,57,668.06 plus interest at 8% p.a. with monthly rest; Sale of mortgaged property.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
+
-EBTS RECOVERY TIRI
LUCKNOW
r Iffice action
proceeding ;en with
date
O.A. No.284/2022
13.08.2025 The Judgment is signed and
pronounced on separate sheqts. Se$a[ately
attached in 09 sheets.
Order be uploaded on the Trlb&naI’s
website.
(Dictated)
[
~*,r
(Pravds Kumar Singh)
Presiding Officer
(Vinay)
| IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIB Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, Case No. OriginalApplication Dated:13.08.202 Punjab National Bank a BodyCl Constituted under the BankingCol (AcqJisition & Transfer ofUndertaki 1970 having its Head Office atPlot Sector10,Dwarka,NewDelhi1101 branches amongst others atRajendri Branch,Bareilly,(U.P.). Versus |
Presidi No.2 PO lpanl g) N 75 C Naga |
.T LUCIKNow Officer If202 icant-bank |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Shri $hiv KumarKakkarS/o ShriSuraj Kakk£r R/o House No. 128B,Mode Bareilly-243001. 2-dAddress: House No. 104A, Mode Bareilly-243001. Fk |
Fraka 1 To |
|
| 2. Smt. Reena Kakkar W/o ShriShiv Kakkgr R/o House No. 128 B,Model Bareilly-243001. 2-dAddress: House No. 104A,Model Bareilly-243001. |
I<um To Tow |
|
| 3. Shri burajPrakashKakkarS/oShri Chand Kakkar R/o House No.128B, Town,Bareilly-243001. 2-dAddress: House No. 104A, Mode Bareijly-243001. |
)eew Mod |
|
| 4. j Smt. Ranjana Kakkar W/o ShriSuraj Kakk£r R/o House No. 128B, Model Bareilly-243001. 2ndAddress: House No. 104A, Mode Bareibty-243001 |
)ra Tow |
|
| 5. . Shri Mahendra Pal Malhotra S/oShri LaIMalhotra R/oHouseNo. B 52Sha Colony, Near Model TownPolice Bareiljy-243001 |
land had howki |
\r/ |
2
o.b. No. 284 of 2022
:ehda nts
iI
hi dvc ;ate
JUDGEMENT
'bank under 1. This qriginal Application has been file ] by tI lpplici Section 19(d) of the Recovery of Debts & Ban kruptl ICt, 19bq, against the ,06 Iii defendants +or the recovery of Rs.1,47,57,66: !es ONe krore, Forty Seven Lacs, ' Fifty Seven Thousand, Six Hun Jred S Eight 4nd Paisa Six Only) together with pendent lite and future i teres' [ sts arid }other reliefs etc.
\ r
o.A. No. 284 of 2022
3
24.09.2015 loan and security documents. Th+ de Fenclant no & 6 signed and executed Guarantee Agreement (Exhibit 4-6). Ate In order to further secure the repayhen1 a the dues, the defendant Nbs. 1 & 2 created equitable mortgage }spect +fproperty i.e Lot No.1: lart of Residential House No. 1b8B si a [odel Town, Bareilly total measuring 41.805 Sq. Mtr. bol ldari df whi re as; East a Rasta 22 ft. wide, West : Part of Plot No. 128 kar, North ouge ;hwari and , H,„„ ,f $„j P„k„h K,kk„ & P,rk, S,„}h n Ors. Lot Fc. 2: Part of Residential HouseNo. 'b1 B SI >d at Model Town, Bare{lly Total admeasuring 102.84 Sq. following No' :rem R boundaries; hast : Part of Plot No. 128 B bbse of Suraj ; tth Sou1 Part of Plot Prakash Kak+kar, West : Rasta 60 Ft. wide, N No. 128B Now therein House of Smt. Rekh: lrl tvour of the bank by dep bsit of title deed and other documEnts in bprop' mortgaged (Exhibit A-7 to Exhibit No. A-11 (c,ny)) t, th b appli+a4pn 5. The d+fendant Nos. 1 & 2 had again Ipro Id the llicant bank for enhance+ent of Overdraft ag,i„,t H,u,i„! Loi bbFEL) [ Rs. 10.00 laos to Rs. #3.00 laos which was duly con: Idet ld OIled by the applicant bi vide its sanction letter dated 08l07.20 (Exhi4itlN,. A- 12 & A- 13) to thisoriginal application. ab 6. To seJure the aforesaid credit facility i. () \r raR a&ahst Housing Loan for Rs. 23.00 lacs the defendant Nob. 1 to L4 e )(b 1 securrty documents in favour of the applicant bt lbit No '14). The defendant n (Exhibit A 15). The d+fendantbs. 5 & 7 signed Nos. I & 2 had and executed exteNded tGu+rantel =.’,'::'.mortgage originally cr+ated on 28.09.2015 to cover tGe Drl It Ov&rdraft against
O.A. No. 284 of 2022
4
duti 8 lett 'r bf continuity Housing Loab (ODHL) of Rs. 23.oo lacs by exe dated 28.09.2016 (Exhibit No. A-16) to this ori! inal apblicatio 7. Accorqing to this original application, m to tbme, d !fbndants had ndant o.1 h Idl signed and deposited c+sh in loan accounts. The defI executed thb balance and security confirm. ti r Eat J 01.06.2021 confirming the balance of the Housing loan a: o4.2021. (Exhibit No.A 17) to this original application. 8. To av£il the aforesaid credit facility, d 1b) I had opened loan accountls in the name of defendant No. 1 0 maiht4in the credit facilities. ItS failed to 9. AR„ ,v,iling the aforesaid credit fac+ terms and maintain fin#ncial discipline and also failed conditions df the loan agreement, consequel loan &c&ount of the defendant nd.1/firm was classified as NPA on 0 by bank as per RBI g„,id,lif„, (Exhibit N,. A-18), thereaR4 the Alpphl It]bank issued e libit No. A Registered jegal Notice dated 28.02.2022 to 19), but, th, d,f,nd,nt, ,t,t,d „,-„,P,„„ an( thI F,d t, +, b,y th, „m, and the load accounts of the defendants are till qq iiI hence, this Original Application has been instituted. e U 10. As peR books of the bank maintained in and 4rdinary course of banking business, an outstanding of Rsl ,47, 468.06 (hupees One Crore, FortySeven Lacs, Fifty Seven Thousanl 1, Si: ldred gi: Eight and Paisa Six O§ly) including interest as on 28 Ire lying due for payment, for which the defendants are jointl lly li4ble to repay the same, which they did not pay despite reI aues and demand. \tr
5
No. 284 of 2022
The Applica+t-bank filed the Statement of Io bn Acc+unts. (dxHibit No.A-20 ban is obtained & A-21) to this Original Application. The japplil valuation report by its approved valuer (Exhbbit Ng -22) to lis original application 11 The c4use of action for filing the pres4nt app ltion ardse firstly on 24.09.20215 when the aforesaid credit facIlity u ;anctioned by the Applicant-bark and the same were availed by the dl ldants abd necessary C ;aid d The cause documents +ere executed by the defendant4 on It No & 2 created of action arose again on 28.09.2015 when defend equitable TAe ca of ac,ti& arose on llortgage of their properties, 07.07.2016 +hen the defendants had again abproal bd the bdplicant bank Loa Rs. 10.00 for enhancehent of Overdraft against Housi1 +DHL) fr+ lacs to Rs on 08.Ot.2016 wh,. .oo lacs. The cause of action agbin aro the applicanl bank had enhanced the aforesaId loi IS. 10 to Rs :.,„„,L, 23.00 lacs le cause of action arose on 08]07.20lb when defendants had execut 4d the security documents. THe c, of a i) arose on 08.09.2016 'hen defendant No.1 & 2 fu4her !nded t equitable mortgage oft heir properties. Cause of actio4 agai1 rose o r ious dates when defenHants deposited cash in their ldan ac ItS le cause of action also brose on 01.06.2021 when def4ndan' ;igned abd executed balance andF security confirmation letter. Ca4se of :ion fI ler arose on had sen to the 28.02.2022 When the applicant bank 4gal n+tibe defendants, Fecalling the entire outstanding dbes arla ley failed to pay the same f t
0 No. 284 of 2022
12 The s+mmons were served upon the aea e h ro registered
post as well as by publication, but the defend+nts did !Hot apQe+r before the Tribunal to contest their case, hence the matt&r prol !ded e Parte against
the defendahts
13 From the perusal of the record, it is evident tI the ddfdndants were of the bank. As the provided with fair opportunities to contest ]he defendants ppted not to contest the case, bontypbint o' onsideration before this 'ibunal is as to whether bank is legally e Id tot amount as claimed in +)riginal Application on the basig of dd en Id pleading
submitted by it
14 In sudport of the case Shri Shiv Kant Sin:
+hief $ahager of the
Applicant-b4nk has filed an affidavit
15 On careful scrutiny of the evideNce V Ind Exhibits marked as :hibit No.A-1 to Exhibit No.A-221 it is dv tda+, defendants had availed : h e c r e d i t fa c i I i t i e s f r o m t h e A P J I i c a n t I & !cuting loan and securitydocuments detailed as above in fbvol C Int-bank. A IT,E= perusal of lhe application, evidence and dbcu reI iea lpon clearly show that defendant had utilized the abov4 loan :ilities a# granted to them. The Lpplicant-bank had maintained +he Books of 4cd8unt in the ordinary coqrse of banking business showing disbu of th4 tban amount The Bank hE d also charged interest from til le to t and Ihb entries are relevant u/s 4 of the Banker Books of Evidenc ) Al iJ also Brdved that the Applicant-b: nk’s claim is within limitation aga nst d dantsJ therefore, the defendants re jointly and severally liable to p ly the dUes
––"T
to.A. No. 284 of 2022
17 The lplicant-bank has claimed intedest@q{§©% p, nnum with monthly rl from 01.03.2022 till the date lof re ltion d costs The contest betdeen Applicant-bank and the defdndant! bmes +o jan end after filing of the O.A. as per the provisions of Se4ti01 of t§ej:Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 (as amended fro +iKe to jtibe) which is analogous t+ Section 34 to the cpc, the Tribunal, :burt hbsl direction in awarding pendent-lite and future interest. 1 m also lppor+ed in my view by Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case titleb JI Ban bf India vs Ravindra anU others reported in AIR 2001 sb pag1 4095. dnjthe basis of foregoing diLcussion, interest of justice will Be s, d if peAdbnt- lite and future inter8st is granted @8.00% per annu lonthl' ISt reducing 1:a balance fro+ the date of filing of the o.A. t :e of rbajlization with costs 18 11 &4uments and I find that the bank has p„,,,d th, e,4,uti„i b+ creation of +„,rtgag, in its f,vo„,. I. the rgsul1 la { Application succeeds as -parte against the defendant Nds. 1 td rith do4+s. The bank has proved the loan execution of loan docum&nts i 'our O le bank and availment o' credit facility. The liability of t e de Uant No 1 to 7 are
11 r \h (~
8 go.A. No. 284 of 2022
joint and several and mortgaged property as ,eII as persc nbl properties
are to be sol
It is, therefore , ordered
df 202 df the AdDP licant bank (i) That +he Original Application No.284 the t of Rs for isguance of Recovery Certificate to .,+7,57,668.06 (Rupees One Crore, Forty Seven Lat Ive n C usand, Six Hundred Sixty Eight and Paisa Six O ly) alo with :he interest ro date c 8.oo q per annum with monthly rest f filing of the he Io. Original Application i.e. 09.03.2022 till fully li&uidated and 11 costs succeeds ex-parte against the defend No to 7. The liabilily of the defendant Nos. 1 to 7 joi ntly and +evera ly I 3 due lithin (ii) The defendants are directed to pay th + r i o d o f t w o ilin ii&h the Adp lica nt-bank monjhs from the date of judgement, t will be entitled to recover the saI le fro the B red assets, a defe FrI ItS. persqnal movables and immovable assl afo bid a C (iii) The Abplicant–bank is entitled to recov4 ant by sale of 'oVision of the mortgage property (if not sold earlil s.A.REF.A.E.s.I. Act 2002). The amoun !covered by :; „Il::.= sale +f mortgaged properties or othl ;e ]all be rdcoverable, if the dbes of the Applicant-bank still rei ain lisfied tAe same shall be recovered by attachment and sale df t r [sona I C .vable assets of th+ defendants jointly and severally of (iv) The dbfendants are hereby restrained by lj+nction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, lienati or in [n+ way dealing C=N
9
a
O.A. No. 284 of 2022
with [heir properties/estates without firs1 ding the blaim of the
Applicant-bank.
(V) Let Recovery Certificate be issued i&medi: +y „1, 1 + (22) of th,
IC
Reco+,ry ,f D,bt, D„, t, B,nk, ,nd +in, Hlhsddd&, A,t, 1993
by nging 13.11.2025 before R.O., DRTJ LuI
(vi) The Applicant-bank is di,ected to file h m 31110 C f cost +or preparing
Rec,+„y c„tin,,t, u/, 19(22) of th, £overy 4f Debts &
Banl+uptcy Act, 1993 .
Judgment is pronounced in the open cdurt.
Dated : 13.08.2025
(Pravab k Jmar sha)
P(e+iding Officer
(Vinay)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bank is legally entitled to recover the claimed amount of Rs. 1,47,57,668.06 based on the executed loan documents and security.
Whether pendent lite and future interest at 8% per annum with monthly rest is applicable given the delay in filing the O.A.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jai Bank of India vs RavindraRelied on¶17
Jai Bank of India vs Ravindra reported in AIR 2001 SC 4095 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Punjab National Bank
Shri Shiv Kumar Kakkar
Smt. Reena Kakkar
Shri Suraj Prakash Kakkar
Smt. Ranjana Kakkar
Shri Mahendra Pal Malhotra
Pravas Kumar Singh
Vinay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
