Allowed

Idbi Bank Limited v. Mr. Dhananjay Pant

DRT17 May 2025TA/2823/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application by IDBI Bank against two defendants for recovery of a housing loan default. The court顺便 noted the defendants' default and barred repayment through sale of mortgaged property if the primary decree is not met within the stipulated time. A recovery certificate was directed to be issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.38,48,529/- with interest and costs within 30 days; direction for issuance of recovery certificate.

Idbi Bank Limited versus Mr. Dhananjay Pant — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.2823 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. 2823 of 2022

¶5

IDBI Bank Limited E-1, Videocon Tower 1st Floor, Jhandewalan Ext. New Delhi-110055 Applicant Versus 1. Mr. Dhananjay Pant s/o Vilas Pant H.No. B-1206, First floor Right side, J.J. Colony Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110096 Also at: R/o H.No.49, Dandi Ward No.46 Molharowala Chak3rate Dehradun-248001 Also at: Flat No.1101, 11TH Floor, C-1 Shree Vardhman Gardenia Sector-10, Sonepat Haryana-130001 2. Shree Vardhman Developers Pvt. Ltd 301-311, 3rd Floor Indraparkash Building 21-Barakhamba Road New Delhi-110001 Defendants Present: Shri Deepak Kochhar, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 21.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 17.05.2025

¶6

T.A. No.2823 of 2022

¶7

FINAL ORDER

¶8

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 21.03.2022 before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Ashish Sachdeva, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.38,48,529/- (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Nine only) as on 25.01.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @8.80% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of its realization and costs.

¶9

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs.36,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs only) on 14.01.2019 @8.65% per annum to be repayable in 300 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.29,720/- in order to purchase under construction flat No.C-1/1101, 11th Floor, Shree Vardhman Gardenia, Sector-10, Sonipat, Haryana, which was being built and developed by defendant no.2.

¶10

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted Loan Application and executed Home Loan Agreement, Irrevocable Power of Attorney, Undertaking cum indemnity Bond, Declaration Letter, Affidavit cum Undertaking, Indemnity bond, Declaration and Undertaking for creation of Mortgage with the applicant bank on 24.01.2019.

¶11

54—

¶12

T.A. No.2823 of 2022

¶13

The Defendant no.2 tendered No Objection Letter for mortgage and executed a Tripartite Agreement with defendant no.1 and the applicant bank on 24.01.2019 in confirmation of lien to secure the repayment of the loan amount in favor of the applicant bank.

¶14

That in order to secure the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage of the property bearing Flat no.C-1/1101, 11th^{Floor, Shree Vardhman} Gardenia, Sector-10, Sonipat, Haryana-130001 with the applicant bank as per permission to Mortgage issued by defendant no.2.

¶15

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant no.1 failed to maintain financial discipline and comply with the terms and conditions of loan despite several requests and reminders and defaulted in payment of monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 09.07.2021 and issued loan recall notice on 18.08.2021 to clear the dues but defendants neglected to return the amounts as per agreements, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶16

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 24.09.2021 was issued to the defendant no.1 calling upon to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank but the defendant did not clear the dues.

¶17

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service the defendants have chosen to absent 5erf

¶18

T.A. No.2823 of 2022

¶19

from the proceedings. As per order dated 10.11.2023, 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.

¶20

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Ashish Sachdeva, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Notarized D.O.P. Authorization Ex.AW-1/1, Application for Loan and Sanction letter Ex.AW-1/2, Pa mission to Mortgage Ex.AW-1/3, Agreement to Sale Ex.AW-1/4, Home Loan Agreement Ex.AW-1/5, Tripartite Agreement Ex.AW-1/6, Undertaking cum Indemnity Bond Ex.AW-1/7, Indemnity bond Ex.AW-1/8, Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/9, Affidavit cum Undertaking Ex.AW-1/10, Recall Notice Ex.AW-1/11, Statement of Accounts Ex.AW-1/12, Banker's Book of evidence Act Ex.AW1/13, Notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act Ex.AW-1/14.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

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

¶24

T.A. No.2823 of 2022

¶25

ORDER

¶26

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.38,48,529/- (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Nine only) along with pendentelite and future interest @8.80% 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 property bearing Flat no.C-1/1101, 11th Floor, Shree Vardhman Gardenia, Sector-10, Sonipat, Haryana-130001. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶27

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

¶28

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 16.07.2025.

¶29

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

¶30

(GOVIND BALL_,T-o-HARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶31

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 17.05.2025

Idbi Bank Limited v. Mr. Dhananjay Pant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Limited v. Mr. Dhananjay Pant

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

State Bank of India versus Sukhwinder Singh

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Sheikh Zubair Aslam

Hdfc Bank versus Gurpal Singh

Canara Bank versus M/S Jigyasha Enterprjses Pvt. Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Suneesh Kumar

Indian Bank versus V.G. Enterprises