Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Kimti Kumar and Another

DRT17 Apr 2025OA/45/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed the applicants ex-parte original application for recovery of Rs. 1.41 cr. against defendants who defaulted on vehicle loans. Uniform simple interest of 8% per annum was granted. Recovery certificate directed.

What did the court decide?

Recovery order for Rs. 1.41 cr. with costs and 8% simple interest; issue of recovery certificate; liberty to enforce through SARFAESI Act.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Kimti Kumar and Another — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.45/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 31.12.2021

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 17.04.2025

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, having its registered office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel- (West), Mumbai- 400013 and also at Plot No.28, HDFC Bank House, Industrial Area, Phase-1, Chandigarh, through its authorized representative, Sh. Rajendra Prasad

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Kimti Kumar S/o Sh. Jit Raj, Ward no. 17, Dhangu Road, NR Angoora Wala Bagh, Shakti Nagar, Pathankot-145001.

¶10

Sh. Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Sham Lal, H. No. 96-H, Prem Nagar, Dhangu Road, Pathankot-145001.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Ms. Dipti Toni, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gagandeep Toni, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.1,41,78,267.00 (Rupees One Crore Fourty One Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Authorized Representative of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 16.10.2021, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Five Vehicles Loans of Rs. 6,57,578.00 of each and Rs. 22,76,232.00 for their body making

¶17

2 OA NO.45/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS KIMTI KUMAR AND ANOTHER

¶18

vide Loan applications dated 30.01.2019, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA and CV-GECL of Rs. 23,69,000 Lacs.

¶19

The applicant Bank sanctioned the Two Vehicles Loan of Five Vehicles Loans of Rs. 6,57,578.00 of each and Rs. 22,76,232.00 for their body making and further for CV-GECL of Rs. 23,69,000 Lacs and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendants had hypothecated their movable properties i.e. Two Vehicle namely:(i) Tata Signa 4018.S CR BS IV, bearing Registration no. PB04AB7733, Engine no. 91A84853639 and Chassis no. MAT447261KAA01669 (ii) Tata Signa 4018.S CR BS IV, bearing Registration no. PB04AB7533, Engine no. 91A84853013 and Chassis no. MAT447261KAA01502 (iii) Tata Signa 4018.S CR BS IV, bearing Registration no. PB04AB7433, Engine no. 91A84853018 and Chassis no. MAT447261KAA01504 (iv) Tata Signa 4018.S CR BS IV, bearing Registration no. PB04AB7333, Engine no. 91A84851778 and Chassis no. MAT447261KAA01200 (v) Tata Signa 4018.S CR BS IV, bearing Registration no. PB04AB7633, Engine no. 91A84853009 and Chassis no. MAT447261KAA01500 Vide Registration Certificates filed in compliance of the order dated 19.10.2024 vide diary no.5446 dated 07.04.2025. Documents executed:- Agreements for loan and guarantee dated 14.02.2019, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA Hypothecation Agreement and Declaration cum Undertaking dated 28.08.2020, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.12.2021, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Original Postal Receipts dated 14.12.2021, which are Annexures A9 & A10 to this OA and

¶21

3 OA NO.45/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS KIMTI KUMAR AND ANOTHER

¶22

Statements of Accounts, which are Annexures A11 to A21 to this OA.

¶23

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in all loan accounts there was adebit of Rs. 1,41,78,267.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

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 14.10.2024.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Authorized Representative, HDFC Bank Limited h as been filed.

¶26

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A21 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 1,41,78,267.00 (Rupees One Crore Fourty One Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Seven Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶27

4 OA NO.45/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS KIMTI KUMAR AND ANOTHER

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @08.25%p.a. in loan account no. 8924466 and interest @ 09.16%p.a. in all rests accounts in Vehicles loan from 08.12.2021 till the realization.

¶29

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 @8.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amounts ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.1,41,78,267.00 (Rupees One Crore Fourty One Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Seven Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank 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 bank 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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

5 OA NO.45/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS KIMTI KUMAR AND ANOTHER

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this

¶33

Tribunal on 15.05.2025.

¶34

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank 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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal.

¶36

Dated: 17.04.2025

¶37

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Kimti Kumar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Kimti Kumar and Another

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

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Bhavya and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Amar Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sandeep Mittal

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Guru Nanak Agriculture Works and Another

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sh. Karnail Singh and Another

Bank of India versus Sh Dev Raj and another