Allowed

Bank of India v. Dilip Kumar

DRT19 Apr 2025TA/1056/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank for recovery of dues against a borrower, guarantor, and developer under a tripartite housing loan agreement. The tribunal proceeded ex-parte and directed sale of the mortgaged flat to recover the debt.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs. 21,16,088.46 with interest and costs; recovery via sale of mortgaged flat if not paid within 30 days.

Bank of India versus Dilip Kumar — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.1056 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

T.A. No. 1056 of 2022

¶5

Bank of India Gandhi Nagar Branch X/918, Chand Mohalla, Gandhi Nagar New Delhi-110031 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Dilip Kumar S/o Mr. Shiv Dayal Prasad 33/1075, Top Floor DDA Janta Flats, Madangir New Delhi-110025

¶8

Also at: 220-D, LIG DDA Flat Pocket-12, Jasola Okhla, Delhi-110025

¶9

Mr. Rajesh Rai s/o Sh. Kedar Nath Rai Plot no.26, Sai Enclave Nandgram Ghaziabad, UP-201001

¶10

M/s Rudra Buildwell Projects Pvt. Ltd. D-53, Okhla Phase-I New Delhi-110020

¶11

Also at:

¶12

A-66, Sector-63 Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301

¶13

Also at:

¶14

Rudra Palace Heights Plot No.GH-02B, Sector-01 Noida Extension, Greater Noida Defendants Uttar Pradesh-201303

¶15

Present: Sh. S.V.Tyagi, Counsel for the applicant bank

cd-

T.A. No.1056 of 2022

Date of Institution: 26.10.2018

¶20

Date of Pronouncement: 19.04.2025

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 26.10.2018 before DRT-II, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Sh. Arvind Kumar Agarwal, au,.horized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.21,16,088.46 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Sixteen Thousand Eighty Eight and Paisa Forty Six only) along with pendentelite and future interest @8.80% per annum with monthly rests plus @2% penal interest from the date of filing this application till the date of its realization and costs. Further, the name of Sh.Pradeep Kumar was substituted as authorized representative in place of Sh.Arvind Kumar Agarwal, erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶23

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs only) on 24.01 2017 to be repayable in 240 EMIs of Rs.17,611/- @8.70% interest per annum along with @2% penal interest from 30.12.2017 in order to purchase under construction Flat No.1603, Tower-B2, 'Palace Heights' Plot No.GH-02B, Sector-01, Noida Extension, Greater Noida-201303, Uttar Pradesh being purchased from defendant no.3 being developer of the project as per builder buyer Agreement dated 04.07.2016 executed between defendant no.3 and defendant no.1.

¶24

T.A. No.1056 of 2022

¶25

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 and 2 submitted loan application and defendants executed D.P Note, Loan bearer letter, Installment letter, Agreement for Home Loan, Multipurpose Documents, Apartment Buyer's Agreement, Tripartite agreement, Special Power of Attorney, Affidavit cum Undertaking, Letter of Lien in favour of the applicant bank on 24.01.2017. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor for the housing loan and executed Deed of Guarantee dated 24.01.2017. In addition, the defendant no.3 executed Tripartite Agreement dated 24.01.2017 with the applicant bank and defendant no.1.

¶26

That in order to secure the loan facility, the defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage of the Flat No.1603, TowerB2, Palace Heights, Plot No.GH-02B, Sector-01, Noida Extension, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh with the applicant bank on 24.01.2017 as per NOC issued by defendant no.3.

¶27

As per Tripartite Agreement dated 24.01.2017 executed by defendants with applicant bank, it was agreed that in the event of failure on the part of defendant no.1, defendant no.3 shall pay the entire money so received by it to the applicant bank. The defendant no.3/builder had undertaken that on receipt of entire consideration amount, they shall execute proper sale deed/lease deed in name of the defendant no.1 and shall deliver the sale deed/lease deed directly to the applicant bank. As per agreement, defendants no.1 to 3 are joi.itly and severally liable to pay the dues of the applicant bank.

¶28

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant no.1 & 2 failed to maintain financial discipline and comply with the terms and conditions of loan despite several requests and reminders

¶29

T.A. No.1056 of 2022

¶30

and defaulted in payment of monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.12.2017 and issued recall notice dated 19.01.2018 and 14.03.2018 to clear the dues but defendants neglected as per agreements, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶31

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service the defendants have chosen tc absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 16.11.2023, 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 Pradeep Kumar (AW-1), authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/1, Sanction Letter Ex.AW-1/2, D.P. Note Ex.AW-1/3, Loan bearer Letter Ex.AW-1/4, Installment Letter Ex.AW-1/5, Agreement for Home Loan Ex.AW-1/6, Multipurpose Documents Ex.AW1/7, Deed of Guarantee Ex.AW-1/8, Apartment Buyer's Agreement Ex.AW-1/9, Tripartite Agreement Ex.AW-1/10, Special Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/11, Affidavit cum Undertaking Ex.AW-1/12, Letter of Lien Ex.AW-1/13, Permission to create Equitable Mortgage Ex.AW-1/14, Payment Receipts and Demand Letter Ex.AW-1/15(Colly), Recall Notice Ex.AW-1/16, Legal Notice Ex.AW-1/17, Demand Letter Ex.AW1/18 & Ex.AW-1/19, Legal Demand Notice dared 12.10.2018 Ex.AW-1/20(Colly), Statement of Account under Bankers Book Evidence Act Ex.AW-1/21, Uncharged & Penal Interest Statement Ex.AW-1/22 and Consolidated Statement of Account Ex.AW-1/23. se?

¶33

T.A. No.1056 of 2022

¶34

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.

¶35

10.^{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.

¶36

11.^{In the light of the above discussions, the Original} Application deserves to be allowed.

¶37

ORDER

¶38

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.21,16,088.46/- (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Sixteen Thousand Eighty Eight and Paisa Forty Six only) along with pendentelite and future interest @10.80% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till its realization with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged Flat No.1603, TowerB2, 'Palace Heights' Plot No.GH-02B, Sector-01, Noida Extension, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶39

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

¶40

T.A. No.1056 of 2022

¶41

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer,} DRT I, Delhi on 18.06.2025.

¶42

(IV)^{Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be} sent to all concerned free of cost. (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI (Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 19.04.2025

Bank of India v. Dilip Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Dilip Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus Prahalad Verma

Hdfc Bank versus Babu Khan

Bank of India versus M/S Gupta Traders

State Bank of India versus Mr. Daljit Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Neeraj Khullar

Bank of Baroda versus Ms. Sarita