Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Heera Singh and Others

DRT25 Jul 2025OA/840/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed a recovery application by Kotak Mahindra Bank against borrowers who failed to repay a sanctioned loan. The bank was granted establishment of the debt along with a reduced interest rate.

What did the court decide?

Declaratory order declaring the defendants liable to pay Rs. 63,02,111.00p jointly and severally with simple interest at 8% p.a. pending issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Heera Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.840/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.07.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 25.07.2025

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., (in which ING Vysya Bank Ltd stands amalgamated and the name of IVBL has been changed to Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.(KMBL) pursuant to the order issued by the Reserve Bank of India under sub section 4 of section 44A of the Banking Regulations Act, 1949, sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation effective from 31.03.2015 as communicated by RBI vide its letter no.DBR.No.PSBD.14527/16.01.136/2014/2015 March 31-2015 and order issued by RBI vide letter no. DBR/PSBD/14476/16.01.136/20142015 dated 31^st March 2015 thus the applicant is the banking company carrying on the banking business under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at 27BKC, C27 G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra(E) and branches at different places one in Pandori, Gola District, Tarn Taran, Punjab through Sh. Munish Sharma Authorized Officer of the applicant.

¶7

	……..Applicant
Versus

¶8

Sh. Heera Singh S/o Sh. Jagtar Singh R/o House No. 44, Village Bhail Dhae Wala, Tehsil Khandur Sahib, District Tarn Taran- 143412.

¶9

Sh. Jaswant Singh S/o Sh. Jagtar Singh R/o House No. 44, Village Bhail Dhae Wala, Tehsil Khandur Sahib, District Tarn Taran143412.

¶10

Sh. Jagtar Singh S/o Sh. Gura Singh R/o House No. 44, Village Bhail Dhae Wala, Tehsil Khandur Sahib, District Tarn Taran143412.

¶11

Sh. Sukhdev Singh S/o Kartar Singh R/o House No. 180, Village Bhail Dhae Wala, Tehsil Khandur Sahib, District Tarn Taran143412.

¶12

2 OA NO. 840/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HEERA SINGH AND OTHERS

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by, Ms. Ramneek Kaur, Advocate proxy for Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for Applicant Defendants already ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.63,02,111.00p (Rupees Sixty Three Lacs Two Thousand One Hundred Eleven only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide delegation of powers & Order of amalgamation issued by Reserve Bank of India dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1, 2 & 3 had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.44.00 Lacs vide Application Form dated 24.05.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.44.00 Lacs vide Credit Arrangement Letter dated 29.05.2014, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 to 3 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 97K-6M detail as under: - i. Land measuring 32K-0M in the name of defendant no. 3, situated at Bhail Dhae Wala, Tehsil Khadur Sahib, District Tarn Taran, Punjab. ii. Land measuring 28K-0M in the name of defendant no. 3, situated at Village Kaler Dhai Wala, Tehsil Khandur Sahib, District Tarn Taran, Punjab

¶18

3 OA NO. 840/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HEERA SINGH AND OTHERS

¶19

iii. Land measuring 37K-6M in the name of defendant no. 1 and 2, situated at Village Kaler Dhai Wala, Tehsil Khandur Sahib, District Tarn Taran, Punjab

¶20

vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 246 dated 16.06.2014, along with its translation, which are Annexures A13 and A14 to this OA. Documents executed: - Order of Amalgamation issued by RBI dated 31.03.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Annexure B-1, Demand Promissory Note, Take delivery letter to DPN, Hypothecation agreement, Deed of Guarantee, Consent letter to be executed by Borrower & Guarantor, Undertaking cum letter of authorization for insuring crop and other movable assets, all dated 29.05.2014, which are Annexures A5 to A12 to this OA; Legal opinion regarding Lien mark dated 28.06.2014, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Notice dated 30.09.2023, along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A16 to A20 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate regarding computer system, which is Annexure A21 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.63,02,111.00p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. 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 04.01.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., h as been filed. 8. 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 had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures

¶21

4 OA NO. 840/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HEERA SINGH AND OTHERS

¶22

A1 to A21 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.63,02,111.00p (Rupees Sixty Three Lacs Two Thousand One Hundred Eleven only) rest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. with half yearly rests from 30.09.2023 till the realization.

¶24

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. along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.63,02,111.00p (Rupees Sixty Three Lacs Two Thousand One Hundred Eleven only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of

¶25

5 OA NO. 840/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HEERA SINGH AND OTHERS

¶26

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 applicant 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.

¶27

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 03.09.2025.

¶30

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶31

Dated: 25.07.2025

¶32

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶33

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Heera Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Heera Singh and Others

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 Sh. Onkar Singh

Messrs Sohan Singh Daljit Singh and Others versus Punjab National Bank and Another

Jasmeet Singh versus Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

State Bank of India versus Sh. Navdeep Singh Sohal and Another

State Bank of India versus Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Others