Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mrs. Nidhi v

DRT13 May 2025TA/1837/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 25,02,417.16 plus adjusted interest. The court reduced interest to 12% annually based on prevailing economic conditions and directed recovery from hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 25,02,417.16 from 18.05.2022 with pendentelite and future interest at 12% per annum from 18.05.2022, recoverable from sale of hypothecated vehicle.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mrs. Nidhi v — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.1837 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. 1837 of 2022

¶5

Kotak Mahindra Bank limited Plot No.7, Sector — 125 3rd Floor, Noida, UP-201303

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mrs. Nidhi V 89, Laxmi Enclave, Ukhlarsi Ghaziabad, UP-201206

¶9

Sh.Atma Ram Tyagi House No.453, Street No.8 Durga Puri Extn. Shandara Mandoli, Saboli North East Delhi-110093 Defendants

¶10

Present: Ms Anisha, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶11

Date of Institution: 12.07.2022

¶12

Date of Pronouncement: 13.05.2025

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 12.07.2022 before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I through Sh. Kumar Jyoti, authorized represerf-ative 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.25,02,417.16 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Two

¶15

SI/

¶16

T.A. No.1837 of 2022

¶17

Thousand Four Hundred Seventeen & paisa Sixteen only) as on 18.05.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @24% per annum with monthly rest from 18.05.2022 till the date of realization and costs.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of Defendant no.1 vide application dated 28.06.2021, the applicant bank sanctioned Rs.37,76,633/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Three only) on 04.01.2019 @10.57% rate of interest with monthly rests for purchase of commercial vehicle which was to be repayable in 47 EMI of Rs.98,514/-. Further, on the request of the defendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned GECL loan of Rs.5,75,700/- (Rupees Five Lacs Seventy Five Thousand Seven Hundred only) on 30.06.2021 under ECLGS scheme @9.25% interest per annum to be repayable in 36 installments. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor for the loan facility availed by defendant no.1.

¶19

That in order to avail the vehicle loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted loan application and both the defendants executed Loan cum Guarantee Agreement, D.P Note and Power of Attorney in favour of the applicant bank on 04.01.2019. In addition, the defendant no.1 executed sanction letter dated 30.06.2021 and Term Loan Agreement along with schedule on 10.08.2021.

¶20

That in order to secure the loan facility, the defendants hypothecated the commercial vehicle by executing deed of hypothecation of vehicle having registration no.UP14HT5001.

¶21

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the Vehicle loan facility, the defendants failed to

¶22

T.A. No.1837 of 2022

¶23

comply with the terms and conditions despite several requests and defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. The account was classified as NPA by the applicant bank and issued loan recall notice dated 20.05.2022 but neglected by the defendants. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶24

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service through publication in newspapers, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 04.03.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶25

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Kumar Jyoti, au‘horized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Board Resolution Ex.AB-1, Loan applications Ex.AB-2, Loan-cum-Guarantee agreements Ex.AB-3, D.P. Note Ex.AB-4, Power of Attorney Ex.AB-5, Request letters Ex.AB-6, Sanction letter Ex.AB-7, Term Loan Agreement Ex.AB-8(Colly), Deed of Hypothecation Ex.AB-9, Copy of Legal notice Ex.AB10, Statement of accounts Ex.AB-11(Colly).

¶26

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.

¶27

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which

¶28

T.A. No.1837 of 2022

¶29

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.

¶30

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.

¶31

In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶32

ORDER

¶33

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.25,02,417.16 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Two Thousand Four Hundred Seventeen & paisa Sixteen only) as on 18.05.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 18.05.2022 till the realization along with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated vehicle having registration no. UP14HT5001. In case of shortfall, the same

¶34

T.A. No.1837 of 2022

¶35

shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶36

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

¶37

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 11.07.2025.

¶38

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

¶39

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