Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Ms Sunrise Developers

DRT12 Sept 2025OA/598/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte application for debt recovery, the Tribunal distinguished the bank's claim of outstanding dues based on loan documents and banker's books. The court held the defendants liable and directed payment of dues, interest, and a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The applicants recover the principal amount plus 8% interest p.a. with monthly rest, costs; recovery certificate issued; recovery from hypothecated and personal assets; restraint on alienation of prop

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Sunrise Developers — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW

¶2

a Office action
proceeding taken with
date
O.A. No.598/2023
12.09.2025 The Judgment is signed and
pronounced on separate sheets. Separately
attached in 06 sheets.
Order be uploaded on the Tribunal’s
website.
(Dictated)
N
IA
(Pravas Kumar Singh)
Presiding Officer
(MK)

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT LUCKNOW

¶4

Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer

¶5

Case No. Original Application No.598 of 2023

¶6

Dated: 12.09.2025

¶7

HDFC Bank Limited, having Branch at 17/4-A, 1;t Floor, Nikhilesh Palace, Ashok Marg, Lucknow – 226001, U.P.

¶8

........Applicant-bank

¶9

Versus

¶10

M/s Sunrise Devlopers (Borrower) Through Proprietor Paramjit Service Station Old Kasana Road, IA Surajpur, Near Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh – 201306.

¶11

Mr. Paramjit Bhati (Co-Borrower) S/o Sri Chand Bhati R/o 193 Mohan Mandir Wali Gali, Greater Noida IA Surajpur, Near Mohan Mandir, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh – 201306. 3. Shri Chand (Guarantor) S/o Sh. Jay Pal, R/a 193 Mohan Mandir Wali Gali Greater Noida IA ......Defendants Surajpur, Uttar Pradesh – 201306.

¶12

Ld. Counsel for Applicant-bank: Shri Ritesh Goel, Advocate Ld. Counsel for the Defendants: None.

¶13

JUDGEMENT

¶14

This Original Application has been filed by the Applicant-bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for the recovery of Rs.51,71,679.33/- (Rupees Fifty One Lacs, Seventy One Thousand, Six Hundred Seventy Nine and Paisa Thirty Three Only) Rs.41,90,675.33 in [Commercial Equipment’s/Vehicle & Business Loan]

O.A. No.598 of 2023

and Rs.9,81,004/- in [CV-WCTL-GECL] together with pendent-lite and future interest, costs and other reliefs etc.

¶20

The brief facts of case are that the defendants No.1 is a borrower and the defendant No.2 is co-borrower and the defendant No.3 is the guarantor. The defendant No.1 on behalf of the defendant No.2 had approached the Applicant-bank for grant of various credit facilities availed i.e. Commercial

¶21

Equipment/Vehicles loan (Annexure No.A-2 & Annexure No.3) to this Original Application.

¶22

At the request of defendant No.1 had approached the applicant bank had lent and advanced financial facility under the said special scheme of ECLGS of Rs.17.39 laos vide its Sanction Letter dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure

¶23

No. A-4) to this Original Application.

¶24

To secure aforesaid credit facilities, defendant No.1 on behalf of the defendant No.2 had executed and signed various security documents in favour of the Applicant-bank on 20.10.2020. The defendant No.3 signed and executed Guarantee Agreement.

¶25

5 . To avail the aforesaid credit facility, the Applicant-bank had opened loan accounts in the name of defendant No.1 in order to maintain the credit facilities.

¶26

After availing the aforesaid credit facility, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and also failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the loan agreement, consequently, the loan account of the defendant no.1/firm was classified as NPA on 07.03.2023 by the bank as per RBI guidelines, thereafter the Applicant-bank issued recall Notice dated 01.05.2023 to the defendants (Annexure No. A-7/8), but, the defendants stated

¶27

O.A. No.598 of 2023

¶28

¶29

no-response and they failed to repay the same and the loan accounts of the defendants are still un-liquidated, hence, this Original Application has been instituted.

¶30

As per books of the bank maintained in the usual and ordinary course of banking business, an outstanding of Rs.51,71,679.33/- (Rupees Fifty One Lacs, Seventy One Thousand, Six Hundred Seventy Nine and Paisa Thirty Three Only) Rs.41,90,675.33 in [Commercial Equipment’s/Vehicle Business Loan] and Rs.9,81,004/- in [CV-WCTL-GECL] including interest upto 26.04.2023, were lying due for payment, for which the defendants are jointly and severally liable to repay the same, which they did not pay despite repeated requests and demand. The Applicant-bank filed the Statement of loan Accounts. (Exhibit No.A-9) to this Original Application.

¶31

The cause of action for filing the present application arose firstly when the aforesaid credit facilities were sanctioned by the Applicant-bank and the same were availed by the defendants and necessary documents were executed by the defendants on 20.10.2020. The cause of action further arose on when recall Notice dated 01.05.2023 was sent to the defendants, recalling the entire outstanding dues and they failed to pay the same.

¶32

The summons were served upon the defendants through registered post, but the defendants did not appear before the Tribunal to contest their

¶33

case, hence the matter proceeded ex- parte against the defendants.

¶34

From the perusal of the record, it is evident that the defendants were provided with fair opportunities to contest the claim of the bank. As the defendants opted not to contest the case, so only point of consideration before this Tribunal is as to whether bank is legally entitled to the amount as

¶35

O.A. No.598 of 2023

¶36

claimed in Original Application on the basis of documents and pleading submitted by it.

¶37

ll. In support of the case Shri Saurabh Singh, Legal Manager of the Applicant-bank has filed an affidavit.

¶38

On a careful scrutiny of the evidence on affidavit and Exhibits marked as Exhibit No.A-1 to Exhibit No.A-9, it is proved that defendants had availed the credit facilities from the Applicant-bank by executing loan and security documents detailed as above in favour of the Applicant-bank. A perusal of the application, evidence and documents relied upon clearly show that defendant had utilized the above loan facilities as granted to them. The Applicant-bank had maintained the Books of account in the ordinary course of banking business showing disbursal of the loan amount. The Bank had also charged interest from time to time and the entries are relevant u/s 4 of the Banker Books of Evidence Act. It is also proved that the Applicant-bank’s claim is within limitation against defendants, therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the dues.

¶39

Accordingly, the defendants are directed to pay the balance dues to the Applicant-bank within a period of 2 months from the date of judgement failing which the Applicant-bank will be entitled to sell the hypothecated assets and personal assets/ properties of the defendants.

¶40

The Applicant-bank has claimed various rate of interest per annum with monthly rest w.e.f. 26.04.2023 till the date of realization and costs. On the basis of foregoing discussion, I am of opinion that cause for interest of justice will be served if pendente- lite and future interest is granted @8%

O.A. No.598 of 2023

per annum with monthly rest reducing balance from the date of filing of the

¶45

O.A. till the date of realization with costs.

¶46

1 find that the bank has proved the execution of loan documents and creation ofhypothecation in its favour. In the result, the Original Application succeeds as ex-parte against the defendants with costs. The bank has proved the loan execution of loan documents in favour of the bank and availment of credit facility. The liability of the defendant Nos.1 to 3 are joint and several and hypothecated asset as well as the personal properties are to

¶47

be sold.

¶48

It is, therefore , ordered

¶49

(i) That the Original Application No.598 of 2023 of the Applicant bank IIIB 1 for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs.51,71,679.33/IIly ! (Rupees Fifty One Lacs, Seventy One Thousand, Six Hundred Seventy Nine and Paisa Thirty Three Only) Rs.41,90,675.33 in [Commercial tIll I Equipment’s/Vehicle & Business Loan] and Rs.9,81,004/- in [CVIIII i WCTL-GECL] and defendant No.3 is liable to pay Rs.30,73,702.41 along with the interest @8% per annum with monthly rest from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 02.06.2023 till the loan is fully liquidated and costs succeeds ex-parte against the defendants.

¶50

(ii) The defendant Nos.1 to 3 are directed to pay the dues within a period of two months from the date of judgement, failing which the III I

¶51

Applicant-bank will be entitled to recover the same from the secured assets, personal movables and immovable assets of the defendants.

b Ma)

O.A. No.598 of 2023

(iii) The Applicant–bank is entitled to recover aforesaid amount by sale of hypothecated assets (if not sold earlier under the provision of the S.A.R.F.A.E.S.I. Act 2002). The amount, if any already recovered by sale of any hypothecated assets or otherwise shall be recoverable, if 1116 1 the dues of the Applicant-bank still remain unsatisfied, the same shall be recovered by attachment and sale of the personal movable assets of the defendant jointly and severally.

¶56

(iV) The defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way dealing with their properties/estates without first paying the claim of the Applicant-bank.

¶57

(V) Let Recovery Certificate be issued immediately u/s 19(22) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 by fixing 03.12.2025 before R.O., DRT, Lucknow.

¶58

(vi) The Applicant-bank is directed to file a memo of cost for preparing Recovery Certificate u/s 19(22) of the Recovery of Debts Bankruptcy Act, 1993 .

¶59

Judgment is pronounced in the open court.

¶60

Dated : 12.09.2025

¶61

( P r a V a S K U m k:1i : h ) Presiding Officer

¶62

(MK)

Hdfc Bank v. Ms Sunrise Developers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Ms Sunrise Developers

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Mr Dipendra Pratap Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Professional Education Trust

Naveen Kumar Sahni versus Central Bank of India

Kailashpati Tiwari Alias Kailasha versus Union Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Mahavir Enterprises

Punjab National Bank versus Mrs Rannu