Allowed

Bank of India v. Arjun Kumar

DRT28 Aug 2025OA/730/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a recovery suit under the RD & FB Act 1993 for a housing loan default totaling approx. 24.93 lakh rupees, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's claim and issued a Recovery Certificate, directing defendants to pay dues within two months or face property sale.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 24,93,674/- plus interest @ 8.00% to the Applicant Bank within two months of the judgment date; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of India versus Arjun Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT LUC I }W resent: Pravas Kumar Singh, qresiding Offic+r Case No. Original Application No.730 of 202 Dated 28.8.2025 B of India, having Branch at Lucknow 4pbHcant Bank Versus Kumar, S/o Chhote Lal io TaI .a, Bhojpur, Raibareily, UP-229202 A is: At: E-265 EWS land Sh: la Nagar Yojna, Eldeco an-II ,ucknow-226002 Mit4ilesh KumaR, W/o Arjun Kumar, R/o Tal Kataila, Bhojpur, Raibareily, UP 229202. Also At: E-265. EWS k,k,h, d, Sharda Nagar Yojna, Eldeco Ldyan II, du^cknow-226002 D :ndants Ld. Coubsel for the applicant-bank: Mr. Hhi Kant, Advo& Ld. Colhsel for the defendants : None JUDGMENI Bank under ThislOrighal Apph„ti,n h,s b„n 614,i by th, ,ppb, Section 191 of the R„,„„y ,f D,bt, & B, \I IP1 Act, lq9+, against the -Four Lac defendantsl for th, „,,,„y of R,.24,93,6l4/-(Rut Ninety3e Thousand, Six Hundred Se' !nty-Four OnI: bg,th„ with pendent-li+ ,nd fut.„ int„„t, ,„t, ,„d ,1 reliefs etc 2 The lbrief facts of case:- the defendadtnos.1 2 are bdrrowers. The defendan1 vide loan application dated 28. 10.2022 }ached the DJq\

¶2

2 LA{ No.730 of 2024

¶3

,ppli„nt-b,nk f,r g„nt of Hom, L,,n of ds.23.48 1,c, w4i< was duly considered and sanctioned by the applicant-bank vide its jction letter dated 09.III.2022 on certain terms and cohditions (Exhidt No.A-2 & Exhibit No.A-3) to this original application. 3. In or Per t, sec„r, th, ,f„„,id H,m, [,,n f„ility ,I i.23.48 lac, the defenddnt nos.I & 2 had executed LS securIty documents +nfavour of the applicant-bank 09.11.2022 lhk I DP Note, [ome Loan, Debit Auth+dty Letter, Lett„ ,f D,cla„ti,d, Ag,eement , I Letter and Multipurpo4e Documents, RBLR Agreement, IL-435, Install Affidavit c+m Undertaking (Exhibit N,. A-Ito Exhibit N, I .12) to this ,rigin,1 ,pp Ii,,ti,n

¶4

Furth br, in order to secure the repayme bt of b,nk dues, t+e d,fe„dant n„.I & 2 +,d „,,ted m„tg,g, ,f th,i,im+,,,bl, p,opedy Ii.,. H,„„ No.E-265, tWS Raksha Khan(1, Sharda N4gar Yojna, El&ejo Udhyan-

¶5

II, Lucknot measuring area 31.40 sq. mtr.[ as detailed in +h+ petition, in favour of de bank (Exhibit N,. A-13 to Ext+bit N,.A-15) + [his „iginal application.

¶6

To a+ail the aforesaid c„dit f„ihty, t+, appli,,nt-b, had opened aloan accoht in the name of defendants id order maI facility.

¶7

ABel availing the af,„„,id „edit fa+ility,the d,f,n4, Its f,iled t, maintain fi+ancial discipli„, ,nd also f,iI,d }o ,omply withf t+, term, ,„d conditions bf the loan ag„,m,„t, ,„„,q„,+tly, the 1,,n 4,hunt, ,f th, defendants F„ ,1„,in,d „ NPA ,„ 28.8.20+3 by th, ,ppb, Wb,nk „ p„ RBI guidejines (Exhibit No. A-18), therefoR, the applicdlt]bank issued Demand N+i„ d,t,d 29.8.2023 „nd„ S„ti.;. 13(2) ,f th, $AkFAESI A,t

¶8

I.Al No.730 of 2024

¶9

¶10

(Exhibit Nd. A-16) and later on also issu4d Possession btice dated No. A- IP) Since, the 07.11.2023 und„ S„ti,n 13(4) ,f the Act (bxhibit d,f,ndants je,e n,t ,,mi„g f,,w„d for rep+ment dues applicantbank issued Legal Notice dated 07.5.2024 (Exhibit N,.A+1}), but, the same Ld the loan epa)r d,f,nd,„t, #,t,d n,-„,p,n„ ,nd f,il,d to account of the defendants is still un-liquidated, hence, Original Application has been instituted.

¶11

As p+ books of the bank maintained inthe usual and 0 tar)' course of banking $usiness, an outstanding of Rs.24,q3,674/„,p„# +w„,ty F,„, Lac, Ninetyi Three Thousand, Six Hundred #eventy Four ') including interest upt4 06.6.2024 were lying due for pakment, which leJdid not pay las filed the despite rep4at,d r,qu„t, ,nd d,m,nds. Th, applicant B, this original copy of gtatement ,f A„,„nt (Exhibit N ,. A-20) t , application.

¶12

Th, q,u„ ,f „ti,„ f„ filing th, p„,qnt ,ppli,,ti,n dse firstly on 09.11.2022 wh,n th, ,b,„,m„,ti,n,d „,dit F„ility y„ „, }ned by the hd defendants applicant-b4nk and necessary documents web executed by The cause df action further arose on 07.5.202' Iy11Vr h e n 1LIF1 e aP P 1 lt-bank had issued leg41 notice ,e„lling th, d,f,„d,n+s t, ,ep,y th, Hues of the ,ppli„nt-b+nk, but, th, d,f,nd,nt,f,il,d t, p4y th, „m,. 9. The #ummons was served upon the [efenl Is thro+g+ registered post, but, +efendants did n,t ,PP„, b,f„, thi, T,ib„n,1 t1) Lontest their case, henc+, the matter pr,„,d,d ,,-p,4 ,gai,;st th, dfendants on 27.3.2025 .

¶13

Frod peru„1 ,f th, „,„d, it i, ,,iI .ent that the d4dndants were provided fbir opportunities to contest the claim of the I bank. As the

¶14

n , „ q
*I AeA'
L \ U

¶15

1: No.730 of 2024

¶16

defendants 6pted not to contest the case, only point of c4nsideration before this Tribunal in as to whether the lb is legally ltled to the nents and amount as cjaimed in o,igi„,1 Appli,,ti,. o+ th, basi, ,f db pleading su1 litted by it.

¶17

11 In su8port of the case Shri Mohd. Sdahid, lief lger of the applicant B: has supported its caseon afnda+it 12 lbit marked On a +areful scrutiny of the evidence oN affidavit and El as (Exhibit +o. A-1 to Exhibit No. A-20 to this b,iginal appli,,b&), it stand, proved that +h, d,f,nd,nt, h,d ,„,il,d th, „,b frot le applicant as ado+e in favour

¶18

Ince d documents ::::'===:=::T:::::::IT„:i"=:: relied upon clearly establishes hat defend: .zed aboveloan facility as g+ant,d t, th,m. The appli„„t b, uas III ltained Le Books of account in de ordinary course of banking busIness showir,g d}, 4u,sal ,f th, loan amoun+.It further shows that bank had degularly credit4d lthe amount paid by the befendants in the books of accou+t. The Bank ha+ 4lso charged interest fro+ time to time and the entries is Felevant „/, 4 df }he Bank„, .’s claim is Book Evid4nce Act. It is also proved that be applicant b: are liable within limit+tion against the defendants, thereFore, the defend to pay the dIes 13 Acc4rdingly, the defendantsaredirecte+ to pay the b#4lce dues to the applil bank within a period of two moNth, f„m the da+e hf judgment failing whi+h the applicant bank will be 4„titled to sell mortgage 'eII as personal properties of the +efendants 14 n in Home p-op''tyI plicant-bank has ,lai,n,d int„„I @9.10o4 p„ Loan Accodnt together with pendent lite an4 future interes II the actual A

¶19

I.Al No.730 of 2024

¶20

¶21

date of its realization and costs. On the basis of the :orego: lg discussion, purpose for interest of justice purpose Will He servel , if PI I d L nt = 1 i t e 1a]c1 d ;count with fun„ i„te,eh is granted @8.00%per annum i+ the above loaI b. A. till the monthly ratq on reducing balance from the daje of filing of a date ofreali;ation with costs.

¶22

1 n„dt h,t th, b,nk h„ p„„,d th, ,,,+uti,n ,f 1,,n 0 lents and „,,ti,„ ,f +n„tg,g, in it, f,v,u,. In th, „4ult, th, o,igi,„ pplication succeeds &parte against the defendants wi}h costs. The je&ndants are bi and the j,intly ,nd #,verany liabl, t, P,y th, d„„ +f th, ,ppli,,nt, td be sold mortgage prbperty as well as the personal proHerties are liable

¶23

16.It is, the+efore,ordered :-

¶24

(i)	+h,tth, o,igi k for issu	„,1A ance	ppn,,ti,„Nd of Recovery	.730,f2024,1 Certificateto	appli tun	cant eof
	.s.24,93,674/ hous,nd, Six iht,r,st @8.oo% ling ,f th, O IIlyliq„id,t,d the defendants.	-(R H„n @%p„ ,igi„a ,nd	upe„Twent d„d S,,,„ty @% ,nn„m i„ th, l ApplicationI ,„t, ,u„„d,,n	yF,u,L„, F,u,O.ly)tog, @% h,,n „CO„„t fd i.e.03.7.2024 di,h„,by, ld	Th with the dat the loa aga	ree the e of nis Inst
(ii)	-hedefendant 'o months f	sare rom	directedto pa the date of j	k the dueswitl udgment,faili]	aperio which	d of the
	,pplicant bank lecured assets, efendants.	will pers	be entitled t onal movables	+ recoverthe andimmovabl+	lefrom of	the the
(iii)	I-heapplicant- bale of mortg	bank age	isentitledto property (if	1 recoveraforesaid Enot sold earlier ( \C H 1	amoun under AP 1 -\|tby the

¶25

e ro.730 of 2024

¶26

ptovisions of the S.A.R.F.A.E.S.I.I Act 2002). le ! amount, if ,y, ,1,e,dy „co„„,d by „le ofmbrtg,g, p„p„ dr otherwise ld only the bi lee amount

¶27

sball be adj„sted towards the debt 'bank still

¶28

'e recoverable. If the due4 of the apphl unsatisfied, the same shall be recovered }y I attachment

¶29

.d sale of the personal movable Ld lovabl ;sets of the

¶30

dbfendants

¶31

(iV) 1+he defendants are hereby res1 led by means of injunction 'om depleting, transferring, enl hbering, alienaLnk or in any ay dealing with th,i, pr,perties/e+tat„ lthout paying the

¶32

c}aim of the appli,ant b,nk. ,et Recovery Certificate be issued lediately u/: Ip(22) ,f the lcovery of Debts Due to Banks ld F: >ial itution Act, Luc] bw

¶33

93 by nxing 28.11.2025 before 4.o., Dl

¶34

nent is pronounced in the open co

¶35

Dated: 28.8.2025

¶36

(Pravas Kuda+ &ngh) Presiding Dfficer

¶37

(Veeresh)

Bank of India v. Arjun Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Arjun Kumar

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 Ms Jai Durga Associates

Shiv Sai Educationals Trust versus Punjab National Bank

Chander Prakash versus Dewan Housing Finance Ltd.

Yes Bank versus M/S Akhil Construction and Earth Movers

Aryavart Bank versus Late Shri Vijay Pal Singh

Kawaljeet Kaur versus Punjab National Bank