Application filed by IndusInd Bank for recovery of Rs. 24,76,608.09 against two growers for defaulted KCC loan. Application succeeded ex parte pending realization of pendent-lite and future interest.
Issued recovery certificate; granted pendent-lite and future interest at 10% per annum reducing balance; directed sale of mortgaged and hypothecated assets.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
V
DEBTS RECOVERY FRI
LUCKNO
LL
Date of order or Order with signature of court Ffice action
>roceedinJ taken with date
OA No. 8m
29.08.2025 The Judgment is signed. and
pronounced on separate she4ts. Separately
attached in 08 sheets.
Order be uploaded on khe Tribunal’s
website.
(§ictated
r-
(PravasKurr ','Singh)
Presidiing Officer
(Manoj)
r
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT LU
:NOW
Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, +residing Offic+r Case No. Original Application No. 880 of 20
Dated: 29.08.20}5
Indi Overseas Bank having its Br4nch at Dewa Branch Barabanki through SHri Vira Kumar Chand, Manager and its pdwer o attorney holder
4pHlicant Bank
Versus Mr. Dukhi Ram S/o Nattha R/o Villag Bila ali Tehsil /Pargana' Fakehpu Barabanki, U.P. 225305 2 Mr. £hiv Kailash S/o Dukhi Ram R/ol Villag Bilauli Tehsil /Pargana' Fabehpu Barabanki, U.P. 225305
d4f4hdants
Counsel foi applicant-bank: Shri Sanjeev SHarma, Advoca+e Counsel for the defendants: None
JUDGEIVIENT
This Original Application has been filed by thI iphlicant Bank under Sectjon 19(1) of the Recovery of D4bts & Bankru4t& Act, 1993, against thq defendants for the recovery bf Rs, 1,76,6bg,09 (Rupees
Twenty-Fo dr Lacs Seventy-Six Thousand kix Hundred Hight and Nine d future inte costs and Paise only) together with pendent-lite a
other reliefs etc
2
Q.4 No. 880 of 2024
KCC Loan. The applicant bank considered tHe requ and sanctioned KCC Loan Facility of Rs. 16[00 lac: vide sg :ion letter
dt. 10.12.20,15 (Exhibit A-3).
Barabanki in favour of the bark.
| a | a | ’lotNI | Al (Hectare ) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | 1.2370 | |||
| 40 | 1.0160 | |||
| 83 | 1.2280 | |||
| 103 | 1.1520 | |||
| 548 | 1.1430 | m8no | ||
| 51 | 15 | .2870 | ||
| 47 | .5490 | M2 | ||
| Damaura | 38 | 152 | 1.3670 | mo |
| Total | III hM IL_<br>BI |
la No. 880 of 2024
5 To avail the aforesaid credit facility,lthe applicant+bbnk opened loan accou in the name of the defendant No.1 After availing the abovementionel credit facil from the applicant-bank, the defendants failed to ainta fina discipline and also failed to comply with the terms abd conditions b lgreernent as required in the matter. The applicant-bdnk made all p4s#jble efforts reminded through oral persuasion and letters etc. Thb deferldants many timesby several applications by the bpplicant-banff t#regularize and h not come the loan acFount, but the defendants kepk mu forward to lake any efforts regarding pa+ment df dues bUt the loan account of the defendants were remained iFregul Ind tHe befendants arizd the account did not card to deposit the amount to adjust/ rl qU despite varipus assurances given by defendbnts Co ly, the loan accounts of the defendant No.1 were classi+ied as A. o :9.12.2023 by the applicant-bank as per RBI guidelin' therefore, applicant lo.A'
bank issued notice Dated 30.12.2023 (Eqhibit !)jand Legal Notice dated 05.02.2024 to the defen&ants Ind r4qhested for repaymentsJ but the Defendants did not P+id thI leed td the same, he de+bndant no hence, this Original Application has been inktituted 1 & 2 also +igned Revival Letter for an a lount of R: bo Lacs on 08.02.2018,28.01.2021 & 07.12.2023.
k'
0 lo. 880 of 2024
4
usual and ordinary As per books of the bank maintaineR in tI course of banking business, an outstahding of Rs. 2F,76,608.09 (Rupees Tl !nty Four Lacs Seventy Six Tho+sand Six Hunqn Eight and Nine Paise only) including interest UPto 29l12.20 rer4 l+ing due for payment, fdr which the defendants are j+intl' !v4r4lly liable to „p,y th, „m,, whi,h th,y did „,t p,y dq,pit, ,+P„t,4 ,hq,,sts and demand. The applicant bank filed the S+atement of 1+ah Accounts
(Exhibit NoIA-14)
8 The cause of action for filing the pr4sent ajplicati4njprose firstIY when the bforesaid credit facility were }anctioned bylt he applicant Bank and ihe same were availed by th+ defendants ,d necessary The cause documents were executed by the defendants on 10.12.20 of action further arose on when demand Noti dt. O 12.2024 was sent to th8 defendants, recalling the enti de outstandingd§es and they failed to pay the same
9 The summons were served up+n th' defeNd+nt through registered Fpost as per the tracking repor[ but the defeh+bnts did not appear bqfore the Tribunal to contest lheir ;e, hedc4 the matter proceedeq ex- parte against the defenda
).AH,N,. 880 of 2024
5
entitled to the amount as claimed in Origi al Applicatiol dh the basis
of documents and pleading submitted by it
In support of the case Sh. Virat Ku&ar Chi B M lger of the
applicant bank has filed an affidavit
12 On careful scrutiny of the evideNce on :idavi' Id Exhibits marked as' Exhibit No.A-1 to Exhibit Fo.A-14 it is Jroved that defendantshad availed the credit faciliti' from the appji&nt-bank by IS abo' favour of executing l&an and security documents d4tailel 'nce and the applic jnt- Bank. A perusal of thel applil :lori, ilized the documents relied upon clearly show thai defendant hdd above loa facilities as granted to thel Th appli4a lank had maintained the Books of account in theordin COU of banking business s6owing disbursal of the loan bmol The &ajnk had also charged inlerest from time to time and th4 entril ire r4le Pant u/s 4 of the Banker Books of Evidence Act. It is al40 prov+d thatjt applicant bank’s cIa is within limitation again: defendan' !refore, the defendant+ are jointly and severally liable +o pay FhI U 2a Acco[dingly, the defendants No. lirec+eg to pay the lonths from balance dues to the applicant bank withih a pe}jod of the date ol judgement failing which the abplica1 bank be entitled to sell th mortgaged properties, hypot ecated asset: ld personal t
assets/ pr&perties of the defendants.
,<br>{r
lnum with 14. The applicant-bank has claimed intqrest@#2% peI monthly regt till the date of realization and costs The codt4bt between applicant-b+nk and the defendants comes to an Ind aft4r #Filing of the O.A. as per +he provisions of Section 19(2) df the 'cove df Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 (as amended frol t to ti which is burt hbsl direction in analogous tp Section 34 to the CPC, the Tribu awarding p+ndent-lite and future intere: llso sudphrted in my lk of India view by Hob’ble Supreme Court in a case titled Qentral R vs. Ravindrb and others reported in AIR #001 S:I lage 3095. On the basis of fdregoing discussion, interest df justi be ,iII bb served if lnum with pendent- Ii+e and future interest is granjed @10% pe monthly raje reducing balance from the da+e of filjng of t$ejF).A. till the date of real+zation with costs
15 1 find that the bank has proved e4ecutioh of lo4nbocuments le Original and creation of mortgage in its favour. In th+ result, Application succeeds as exparte against the defehdant NoI1 & 2 with costs. The liability of the defendant No. 1 + 2 are! joint a4dl+everal and ,„„tg,ged p „p„ty, hyp,th„,t,d , „e} as q eII IS t personal properties +re to be sold
It is, lerefore , ordered
(i) That the Original Application No.840 of 1024 of tI applicant bank for issuance of Recovery Ce}tificate to th# kune of Rs. 24,7+,608.09 (Rupees Twenty Fou+ Lacs ?eventys4£ Thousand
J
| 10% Origi 16 and SixH |
')al t hI with ler annum with monthly restf+om datec nal Application i.e. 16.08.2024thllthe loanisf costssucceedsexparteagainstthe defendant HindredEightandNine Paiseon l4interest 'fFilingofthe IIPliquidated Idl I&2. |
|
|---|---|---|
| (ii) | The ===„==:::„:"„=::::==::::::::„:::: secu defe |
defendants aredirectedtopayIthedueswit ===„==:'::„:"„=-':::':==::::::::„:::: which the from the ;setsof the Fedassets, personal movabIes +ndimmovabl. ndants injaperiod of |
| iii | The a– sale & earli1 } amo + assei appl reco asse |
pplicant–bank is entitled to r4coveraforesabdIamountby of mortgage property & hypokhecatedassl if notsold br under the provision of the sIA.R.F.4.E.s.1. 4c} 2002).The bnt, if any already recovered +y sale ofanyh+pothecated if th4 Ques ofthe s or otherwise shall berecoberabt icant bank still remainunsa}isfied,thesi le shallbe IImovable vered by attachment and salb of theper40 tsofthe defendantjointlyandqeveral |
| iv | The d fro way: / theQ |
efendants are here by restraIned by mean' depleting, transferring, encu+berin: alienT''r #f'~':'* tihg or inany : dealing with their properties/estates withobt firstpaying Qlaimof theapplicant-bank. |
No. 880 of 2024
(v) Let Rl covery Certificate be issued idmediately u/s IP (22) of the Reco 10.11.2025 /ery of Debts & Bankruptcy Ack, 1993 by fixipg befo e Recovery Officer, DRT, Luckn&w
Judgement is pronounced in the open cou
Date I: 29.08.2025
r ,\r Pravas K m,r gigI) Pr4sikiing Officer
MS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant bank is legally entitled to recover the claimed outstanding amount based on executed loan and security documents.
Whether fair opportunity was provided to the defendants to contest the case filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act.
What interest rate should be granted pending litigation and for future interest under Section 19(2) of the RDB Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gujarat State Finance Corporation vs. Ravindra and othersRelied on¶51
Gujarat State Finance Corporation vs. Ravindra and others, AIR 2001 SC 3095 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
IndusInd Bank (through Shri Vira Kumar Chand, Manager and power of attorney holder)
Mr. Dukhi Ram S/o Nattha
Mr. Shiv Kailash S/o Dukhi Ram
Pravas Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
