Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Lovejot Singh

DRT2 Sept 2025OA/519/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act to recover Rs.36,48,177/-plus interest from defendants who failed to repay an agricultural loan, directing recovery through sale of mortgaged and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs.36,48,177/- with interest; issued Recovery Certificate; directed sale of mortgaged land and personal property for distribution of proceeds.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Lovejot Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 519 of 2023 Date of Institution: 15.02.2023 Date of Decision: 02.09.2025

¶4

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. having its branches all over India and a branch at Malewal, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Lovejot Singh s/o Satnam Singh r/o H.no.43, Village Ghanie Ke Bet, Tehsil Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶8

Prabhjot Singh s/o Satnam Singh r/o Village Dharamkot, Randhawa, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶9

Binder Kaur w/o Satnam Singh r/o H.no.43, Village Ghanie Ke Bet, Tehsil Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶10

Kuldip Singh s/o Chanan Singh r/o Village Dharamkot, Randhawa, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶11

……….Defendants

¶12

Advocates

¶13

Sh. Sumeet Sehgal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte .

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.36,48,177/- with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 15.02.2023.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Kotak Mahindra 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.36,48,177/- with interest against Sh. Lovejot Singh and others (defendants).

¶17

Bank’s case is that on 10.01.2015, it had granted a loan of Rs.25.00Lacs to defendant nos.1 to 3 in the form of K.C.C. Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant nos.1 and 2 had mortgaged their land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant no.4 stood as the guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest

¶18

¶19

@12% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 30.12.2022, a sum of Rs.36,48,177/-was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests,
defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.
3. On 18.04.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by
registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 12.04.2024, they were proceeded_ex_ parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Munish Sharma, Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-18.
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 loan of
Rs.25.00Lacs and on 30.12.2022, a sum of Rs.36,48,177/-was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.36,48,177/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Forty Eight Thousand One
Hundred and Seventy Seven Only) with interest @12% per annum with
half-yearly rests from 15.02.2023, 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 land fully
detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal
movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
10.10.2025,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgaged property(ies) and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.

¶20

¶21

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: 02.09.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh Amanpreet (Law Researcher)

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Lovejot Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Lovejot Singh

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

Shyamala Murali versus State Bank of India

Tajshree Enterprises Th Partner Khushita Prashant Bhute versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Sadhu Singh

M/S D P Mini Rice Mills Gram Udyog Smiti versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Federal Bank versus Sheena Paul

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Mrs Rafiya Jan