Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar

DRT24 Nov 2025OA/959/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte application under the DRT Act, the Tribunal allowed the bank's claim for recovery of loan dues of Rs.33.15 lakhs. The court reduced the applicable interest rate from the claimed 18% to 12% per annum while directing issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate directed for payment of Rs.33,15,031.75 plus interest at 12% per annum and costs; defaulter to face sale of properties.

Hdfc Bank versus Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar — Cheque Dishonour | DRT (2025)

¶1

O.A. No. 959 of 2022

¶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.959 of 2022

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd.

¶6

Plot No.31, Najafgarh Industrial Area Tower A, 1st Floor Shivaji Marg, Moti Nagar New Delhi-110015

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh.Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar R/o Flat No.309, Guru Dass CGHS Sector-22, Plot No.3B, Dwarka New Delhi-110077

¶10

Also at:

¶11

Sh.Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar 1123/49, Multani Mohalla Geeta Colony East, Delhi-110031

¶12

Also at:

¶13

Sh.Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar NEC Technologies India Pvt.Ltd.

¶14

to 116, 1st Floor, Splendor Forum 3 District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110025

¶15

Defendant

¶16

Present: Ms Amita Kumari, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶17

Date of Reserve: 14.11.2025

¶18

Date of Pronouncement: 24.11.2025

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 26.10.2022 through Ms. Swathi Vajjhala, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of

¶21

¶22

O.A. No. 959 of 2022

¶23

Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.33,15,031.75 (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Fifteen Thousand Thirty One and paisa Seventy Five only) as on 22.09.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @18.00% per annum from 23.03.2022 till its realization along with costs.

¶24

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant, the applicant bank sanctioned Personal Loan for a sum of Rs.38,49,092/- (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Nine Ninety Two only) on 15.01.2020 @10.75% per annum, which was to be repayable in 79 Equated Monthly installments of Rs.76,568/-.

¶25

In order to avail the loan facility, the defendant submitted loan application dated 13.01.2020 and executed Original Loan Agreement by applied, accepting, authenticated, signed and delivery the documents through Net Banking agreed the terms of sanction towards favour of the applicant bank.

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and regularize the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank terminated the facility and declared the account as NPA and issued legal notice on 05.09.2022 but was neglected by the defendant. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶27

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite of proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 18.09.2025, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared

¶28

¶29

O.A. No. 959 of 2022

¶30

before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

¶31

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of Affidavit of Ms. Swathi Vajjhala , authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Board Resolution Exhibit AW1/1„ Loan Application Form Exhibit AW1/2, Loan Agreement along with Terms and Sche4dule along with Sector 65 B Certificate of Evidence Act Exhibit AW1/3(Colly), Legal Notice along with Postal Receipts Exhibit AW1/4(Colly), Speed Post Delivery Reports Exhibit AW1/5(Colly), Certified Statement of Account along with Foreclosure / Prepayment Letter Exhibit AW1/6(Colly).

¶32

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 approved.

¶33

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.

¶34

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

¶35

¶36

O.A. No. 959 of 2022

¶37

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 defendant to pay to the applicant bank, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.33,15,031.75 (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Fifteen Thousand Thirty One and paisa Seventy Five only) as on 22.09.2022 together with pendentelite and future interest @12.00% per annum from 23.09.2022 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶41

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

¶42

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 22.01.2026.

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 24.11.2025

¶46

Hdfc Bank v. Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Jagjeevan Singh Bhullar

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

Manish Kumar versus Punjab National Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Dilbag Trading Co.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Aijaz Ahmad Kuchay, (Erstwhile M/S Aijaz Brick Kiln)

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Deepak Electric Company

Indian Bank versus M/S Prince Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Swati Khanna @Swati Dhaiya