Allowed

Idfc First Bank Ltd. v. Rajji Narang

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/364/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of a defaulted car loan of Rs. 37 lakhs filed under the RDBFI Act. The respondent borrowers were absent. The Tribunal awarded the principal sum, interest at 12% per annum, costs, and authorized recovery from the hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 37,01,444.76 plus interest at 12% p.a. and costs to be made within 30 days; recovery after sale of hypothecated vehicle.

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Rajji Narang — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

O.A. NO. 364 of 2024

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No. 364 of 2024

¶5

IDFC First Bank Limited Upper Ground Floor no.62/20 New Rohtak road, Karol bagh New Delhi-110005

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ms Rajji Narang B-181, Belvedere Towers, DLF Cyber Hub DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase 2

¶9

Sikanderpur Ghosi 68 Gurgaon, Haryana-122002

¶10

Also at: Building No.9B, DLF Cyber City Gurgaon, Haryana-122002

¶11

Pawan Narang B 181, Belvedere Towers DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase 2 Sikanderpur Ghosi 68 Gurgaon, Haryana-122002

¶12

Also at:

¶13

Building No.9B, DLF Cyber City Gurgaon, Haryana-122002 Defendants

¶14

Present: Sh.Harshit Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶15

Date of Reserve: 29.10.2025

¶16

Date of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 29.05.2024 through Mr. Shakti Singh, authorized representative of the applicant bank, under section 19 of

¶19

¶20

O.A. NO. 364 of 2024

¶21

Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.37,01,444.76 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs One Thousand Four Hundred Forty Four and paisa Seventy Six only) as on 23.04.2024 along with pendentelite and future interest at contractual rate till the date of realization along with costs. Further, the name of Ms. Meesha Bhabra was substituted as authorized representative in place of Mr. Shakti Singh, erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendants vide loan application dated 03.05.2022, the applicant bank sanctioned Used Car Loan facility to the tune of Rs.44,78,731/- (Rupees Forty Four Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty One only) ©14.50% interest per annum, which was to be repayable in 60 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.1,05,377 /- in order to purchase Toyota Fortuner Car.

¶23

That in order to avail car loan facility, the defendants submitted Vehicle Loan Application form on 03.05.2022 and executed Approval/Sanction Letter, Vehicle Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement dated 10.05.2022 towards the applicant bank.

¶24

That in order to secure the vehicle loan facility, the defendants hypothecated the vehicle namely Toyota Fortuner (2016-2020) car bearing Registration No.DL-1CAC-0663, Chassis No.MBIV3GS700810694-0819, Engine No. 2TRA656112 with the applicant bank on 10.05.2022.

sd-

O.A. NO. 364 of 2024

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid car loan facility, the account maintained by defendants remained irregular due to non payment of interest / installments in the account and failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction. Ultimately, the applicant bank issued Loan Recall Notice dated 27.04.2024 but defendants failed to deposit the outstanding amount.

¶29

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 29.05.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendants.

¶30

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Mr. Shakti Singh, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Letter of Authorization, Loan Application Form, Loan agreement, Statement of Account & Foreclosure Statement marked as Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-5.

¶31

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶32

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

O.A. NO. 364 of 2024

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶37

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶38

ORDER

¶39

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.37,01,444.76 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs One Thousand Four Hundred Forty Four and paisa Seventy Six only) as on 23.04.2024 together with pendentelite and future interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 23.04.2024 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated vehicle Toyota Fortuner (2016-2020) bearing Registration No.DL1CAC0663, Chasis No.MBJAX3GS700810694-0819. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶40

(I) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶41

¶42

O.A. NO. 364 of 2024

¶43

(II) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 16.01.2026.

¶44

(III) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶45

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶46

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 19.11.2025

¶47

Idfc First Bank Ltd. v. Rajji Narang

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idfc First Bank Ltd. v. Rajji Narang

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Jagar @Jaggar Singh @Ujjagar Singh

State Bank of India versus Manjit Kaur

Ms Supreme Briquettes versus Hdfc Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Praveen

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Harjeet Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Raja Ram Mishra