Allowed

Idfc First Bank Limited v. Blue Sky Aviation

DRT19 Jul 2025TA/2719/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an original application filed by a bank for recovery of outstanding loan dues. Proceeded ex-parte against absent respondents, the tribunal directed payment within 30 days and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing payment of Rs. 24,45,898.36 with interest and costs within 30 days and issuance of a recovery certificate for execution of the amount.

Idfc First Bank Limited versus Blue Sky Aviation — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 2719 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.2719 of 2022

¶5

IDFC First Bank Limited

¶6

Upper Ground Floor No. 62/ 20, Opposite New Prem Dhaba & Big Bazzar, New Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.Blue Sky Aviation
Suite 309, Rg Complex Plot No. 8 Central Market, Sector 5 Dwarka,
New Delhi- 110075

¶9

Also at: F.No-94A, Gali No.35, Raja Puri Uttam Nagar, West Delhi-110059

¶10

Sri Javed Ali Suite 309, Rg Complex Plot No. 8 Central Market, Sector 5 Dwarka, New Delhi- 110075

¶11

Also at:

¶12

F.No-94A, Gali No.35, Raja Puri Uttam Nagar, West Delhi-110059 Defendants

¶13

Present: Shri Ali Kazi, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Institution: 20.09.2021

¶15

Date of Pronouncement: 19.07.2025

¶16

T.A. No. 2719 of 2022

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 20.09.2021 before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I, Delhi through Shri Farid Ahmed, authorized 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.24,45,898.36/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Eight and Thirty Six Paisa only) @ floating rate of interest @9.25% plus 2% penal interest and such other charges as per the agreed terms of the loan agreement from date of filing of this application till the date of realization along with costs. Further, the name of Shri Sagar Juneja was substituted as authorized representative in place of Shri Farid Ahmed erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶19

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendants vide loan application dated 30.09.2019, the applicant bank sanctioned Credit facility for a sum of Rs.25,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs and Fifty Thousand only) which was to be repayable in 36 installments of Rs.92,830/- each and later sanctioned a supplementary loan of Rs.4,66,186/- (Rupees Four Lacs Sixty Six Thousand One Hundred Eighty Six Only) on 30.06.2020 under GECL Scheme which was repayable in 48 equated monthly installments of Rs.3594/- (Rupees Three Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Four) each as requested by the defendants against Mortgage Loan Agreement.

¶20

That in order to avail the loan facilities, the defendants signed and executed various documents such as Disbursal

¶21

¶22

T.A. No. 2719 of 2022

¶23

Request Form, Account Statement, Demand Promissory Note, Supplementary Loan Agreement and Foreclosure Letter.

¶24

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and not routed their transactions through the account and failed to regularize the account with the applicant bank. The applicant bank issued a legal notice dated 25.08.2021 to make the entire payment within 7 days but defendants failed to regularize the accounts, hence the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶25

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite of proper service through publication in newspaper, the defendant has chosen to remain absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 19.09.2022, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

¶26

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Sagar Juneja, as authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the Original/Copy documents of Orders by NCLT, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Loan Documents, Notice, Statement of Accounts and Certificate u/s 2A of The Bankers Book Evidence as EX AW-1/A to EX AW-1/F.

¶27

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the

¶28

¶29

T.A. No. 2719 of 2022

¶30

applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

ORDER

¶34

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.24,45,898.36/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Eight and Paisa Thirty Six only) along with cost, pendentelite and future interest as per the agreed terms of the loan agreement from date of filing of this application till the date of realization along with costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of assets and properties of the defendants. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶35

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

¶36

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 20.09.2025.

¶37

¶38

T.A. No. 2719 of 2022

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 19.07.2025

Idfc First Bank Limited v. Blue Sky Aviation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idfc First Bank Limited v. Blue Sky Aviation

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

Bank of India versus Lalji Bhoja Maru

Ms Maa Durga Fly Ash Bricks and Paver Block versus Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Jaswant Singh (Since Deceased)

State Bank of India versus Rattan Singh Chauhan

State Bank of India versus M/S Alkitab Paper Conversion Industry

Union Bank of India versus M/S Gauri Enterprises