Allowed

Idfc First Bank Ltd. v. Guddu Gupta

DRT23 Dec 2025OA/855/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by IDFC First Bank Ltd. to recover dues from two defendants who defaulted on a loan against property. After an ex-parte auction of the charged property yielded insufficient proceeds, the court directed the respondents to pay the outstanding sum with interest at 12% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 21,11,149.70 as on 30.09.2023 along with pendent lite and future interest at 12% p.a. from 01.10.2023.

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Guddu Gupta — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

O.A. No. 855 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No. 855 of 2023

¶5

IDFC First Bank Ltd.

¶6

Upper Ground Floor No.62/20, Opposite New Prem Dhaba & Big Bazar New Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh New Delhi-110005

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr. Guddu Gupta KH.No.1304, Plot No.105, GF-2 Hyat Enclave SLF Ved Vihar Loni, Ghaziabad, UP-201102

¶10

Also at:

¶11

Mr. Guddu Gupta 761/23, Street No.23, Joshi Road Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005

¶12

Mrs Renu Gupta

¶13

KH.No.1304, Plot No.105, GF-2 Hyat Enclave SLF Ved Vihar Loni, Ghaziabad, UP-201102

¶14

Also at:

¶15

Mrs Renu Gupta 761/23, Street No.23, Joshi Road Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005

¶16

Defendants

¶17

Present: Sh.Harshit Singh Sisodia, Counsel for applicant bank

¶18

Date of Reserve: 12.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.12.2025

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

This original application has been filed by the applicant on 27.10.2023 through Shri Ashutosh Sharma, authorized

¶21

¶22

O.A. No. 855 of 2023

¶23

representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 to be read with Sub-Section (10) of Section 13 of Securitization Act 2002 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.21,11,149.70 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Eleven Thousand One Hundred Forty Nine & paisa Seventy Only) as on 30.09.2023 together with pendentelite and future interest @ contractual rate of interest from 01.10.2023 with costs.

¶24

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendants vide loan application dated 18.08.2018, the applicant bank sanctioned Loan Against Property Loan of Rs.20.00 lacs (Rupees Twenty Lacs Only) ©18% rate of interest on 26.09.2018 to be repayable in 240 EMI of Rs.22,723/- and disbursed the amount subject to periodical review / renewal against property situated at DLF Ankur Vihar, Loni, Ghaziabad.

¶25

In order to avail the loan against property facility, the defendants submitted Loan Application dated 18.08.2018 and executed Sanction Letter with terms and conditions and Loan Agreement on 28.09.2018 in favour of applicant bank.

¶26

That in order to secure the loan against property facility, the defendants created security interest of immovable property being All that piece and parcel of Flat No.GF-2, GF, Middle Portion without roof rights, Plot No.A-4/15, DLF Ankur Vihar Hadbast, Gram Loni, Pargana & Tehsil Loni, Ghaziabad, UP in the favour of the applicant bank.

¶27

It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions either towards principle or interest or charges

¶28

O.A. No. 855 of 2023

¶29

despite several requests, personal visits by representatives of the Applicant Bank. The applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 01.08.2019 as per RBI guidelines but no response from defendants to clear the overdue amount, hence the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues.

¶30

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 25.09.2019 was issued to the defendants to liquidate the outstanding of Rs.20,90,709.88. The applicant bank took physical possession of property and auctioned the property on 06.01.2023 for Rs.10,29,079/-. The applicant bank issued Sale Certificate dated 08.02.2023 to highest bidder and appropriated the amount in the account of defendants and issued demand notice dated 10.10.2023 for repayment of remaining dues.

¶31

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service including publication in newspaper, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 05.08.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶32

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Ashutosh Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant who has proved the documents as Letter of Authority Exhibit AW-1/1, Loan Application Form Exhibit AW-1/2, Sanction Letter Exhibit AW1/3, Loan Agreement Exhibit AW-1/4, Demand Notice u/s 13(2) Exhibit AW-1/5, Sale Certificate Exhibit AW-1/6, Certified

¶33

O.A. No. 855 of 2023

¶34

Statement of Account under Bankers Book Evidence Act Exhibit AW-1/7, Demand Notice dated 10.102023 Exhibit AW-1/8.

¶35

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶36

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶37

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶38

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶39

ORDER

¶40

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within 30 days, a sum of

¶41

O.A. No. 855 of 2023

¶42

Rs.21,11449.70 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Eleven Thousand One Hundred Forty Nine & paisa Seventy Only) as on 30.09.2023 together with pendentelite and future interest @12% per annum from 01.10.2023 till the date of realization along with costs. In case of shortfall, the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable property of the defendants.

¶43

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶44

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 20.02.2026.

¶45

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶46

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶47

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 23.12.2025

Idfc First Bank Ltd. v. Guddu Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idfc First Bank Ltd. v. Guddu Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Ms. Indu Soni

Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank) versus Parminder Singh

Canara Bank versus Iqbal Singh

Srt Subrata Mahanta and Anr. versus Punjab National Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Shubh Foods Products Co.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Skyla Fashion