Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr.Usman Khan

DRT11 Apr 2025TA/1191/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of loans, interest, and costs totaling Rs.49,74,396 from a borrower and a guarantor who failed to repay a housing loan. The defendants were proceeded ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.49,74,396 plus pendent lite and future interest @11.05% p.a. with monthly rests and costs within 30 days; failure leads to recovery from sale of mortgaged property and ot

State Bank of India versus Mr.Usman Khan — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.1191 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

T.A. No. 1191 of 2023

¶5

State Bank of India SARB Branch

¶6

23, Najafgarh Road New Delhi — 110015

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1.^{Mr. Usman Khan s/o Mr. Jameer Khan} A-54, Ashok Moha:la, Nangloi, Nilothi, Delhi-110041

¶10

Also at:

¶11

M/s New Look

¶12

House No.103, Kavita Colony Nangloi, Near Badi Masjid Delhi-110041

¶13

M/s Vocational Education Foundation Through its Chairman/ Secretary Plot no.4, Knowleage Park-I Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar Defendants Uttar Pradesh

¶14

Present: Shri Pradeep Dhaka, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶15

Date of Institution: 26.11.2019

¶16

Date of Pronouncement: 11.04.2025

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 26.11.2019 before DRT-II, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Ashok Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of

¶19

¶20

T.A. No.1191 of 2023

¶21

Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.49,74,396/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Six only) as on 14.11.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.05% pe 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.Ashok Kumar Gupta was substituted as authorized representative in place of Sh.Ashok Kumar, erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 vide loan application dated 22.03.2018, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs.51,00,000/(Rupees Fifty One Lacs) and Home Loan Suraksha Insurance of Rs.57,111/- (Rupees Fifty Seven Thousand One Hundred Eleven only) on 17.04.2018 to be repayable in EMI of Rs.42,103/- and Rs.573/- respectively, @8.80% interest per annum in order to purchase under construction flat bearing No.4182, 18th Floor, Tower-4, White House Apartments, Plot no.8, Sector-Pi, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh.

¶23

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted Loan Application dated 22.03.2018 and executed Loan Arrangement Letter, Housing Loan Agreement, Agreement to Mortgage, Agreement for SBI Life Insurance all dated 17.04.2018 in favour of applicant bank. in addition, the defendant no.1 and 2 executed Tripartite Agreement dated 17.04.2018 with the applicant bank.

¶24

¶25

T.A. No.1191 of 2023

¶26

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage of the property bearing No.4182, 18th^{Floor, Tower-4, White House Apartments, Plot} No.8, Sector-Pi, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh on the basis of No Objection Letter dated 04.02.2016 issued by the defendant no.2 with the applicant bank on 17.04.2018.

¶27

As per Tripartite Agreement dated 17.04.2018 executed by defendants with applicant bank, it was agreed that in the event of failure on the part of Defendant no.1, defendant no.2 shall pay the entire money so received by it to the applicant bank. The defendant no.2/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, the applicant bank shall have first lien over the flat being constructed and issued no objection for creating equitable mortgage.

¶28

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant no.1 failed to maintain financial discipline and comply with the terms and conditions of loan despite several requests and remincers and defaulted in payment of monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified housing loan account as NPA on 03.10.2018 and Suraksha Insurance Loan on 30.06.2019 and issued legal notice on 16.11.2019 to clear the dues or cancel the booking of flat and refund the amount but defendants neglected to return the amounts as per agreements, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶29

¶30

T.A. No.1191 of 2023

¶31

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 27.11.2024, 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 Ashok Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Gazette Notification dated 27.03.1987 Ex.AW1/1, Loan Application Ex.AW-1/2, Arrangement Letter Ex.AW1/3, Agreement for Home Loan Ex.AW-1/4, Agreemer': to SBI Life Insurance Ex.AW-1/5, Agreement to Mortgage Ex.AW-1/6, Allotment Letter Ex.AW-1/7, Permission to Mortgage Ex.AW1/8, Tri-partite Agreement Ex.AW-1/9, Demand Notices and Original Postal Receipts Ex.AW-1/10 & Ex.AW-1/13, Statement of Account Ex.AW-1/14.

¶33

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.

¶34

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.

¶35

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

T.A. No.1191 of 2023

ORDER

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.49,74,396 (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Seventy four Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Six only) along with pendentelite and future interest @11.05% 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 property bearing No.4182, 18th Floor, Tower-4, White House Apartments, Plot No.8, Sector-Pi, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶40

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

¶41

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer,} DRT I, Delhi on 10.06.2025.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 11.04.2025

State Bank of India v. Mr.Usman Khan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr.Usman Khan

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

Mr Mahadevappa and Gurushantappa Gibbur versus State Bank of India

Sri Babajigouda Satagouda Patil Since Deceased by His Lrs versus Canara Bank

Ms Shree Shyam Fashions versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Deepak Kumar

Canara Bank versus M/S Addu Mod Kidz

State Bank of India versus Sh. Naveen Kumar Saini