Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Veena Trans Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

DRT6 Oct 2025TA/2858/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Deposits Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a loan of Rs.27,27,460.99 from respondents who defaulted on vehicle loans. The matter was decided ex-parte due to the respondents' absence, and directions were issued for payment or sale of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs.27,27,460.99 with interest within 30 days or face recovery from hypothecated and other assets via Recovery Officer.

Hdfc Bank versus Veena Trans Solutions India Pvt… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.2858 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. 2858 of 2022

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd. Plot No.31, Najafgarh Industrial Area Tower A, 1st Floor, Shivaji Marg, Moti Nagar New Delhi-110015 Applicant
Versus
1. M/s Veena Trans Solutions India Private Limited Through its Director BG 256, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar Samaypur Petrol Pump, Delhi-110042 Also at: M/s Veena Trans Solutions India Private Limited BG 295,2ndFloor, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar Petrol Pump Delhi-110042
2. Sonia d/o Sudershan Awasthi A-38, Street no.14, Sanjay Nagar Adarsh Nagar, Azadpur N.S. Mandi North West Delhi-110033
3. Singara Singh Panag s/o Pakhar Singh Panag Village Kahanpura Teh Amloah Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab-140406 Defendants
Present: Mr. Navin Kumar, Counsel for the applicant bank
Date of Reserve: 09.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 06.10.2025

¶6

T.A. No.2858 of 2022

¶7

FINAL ORDER

¶8

This original application has been filed by the applicant •ank on 11.02.2020 before DRT-III Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I, Delhi through Shri Abhijeet Raj, authorized r-presentative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of ecovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the •efendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,27,460.99 (Rupees wenty Seven Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand Four Hundred sixty and paisa Ninety Nine only), out of which Rs.20,40,717.50 as on 28.12.2019 in first loan account and Rs.6,86,743.49 as •n 03.10.2019 in second loan account along with interest •endentelite and future @9.50% per annum from 28.12.2019 t II the date of realization in full and costs.

¶9

The brief facts Of the case are that at the request of •efendant no.1 being private limited company through •efendant no.2 and 3 as directors/guarantors as per Board esolution dated 09.06.2017, the applicant bank sanctioned wo Commercial Vehicles loans for Rs.53,25,000/- (Rupees 'fifty Three Lacs Twenty Five Thousand only), which were to •e repayable in 47 EMIs of Rs.68,065/- each in both loan accounts against hypothecation of vehicles. The defendant o.3 stood as guarantor for the vehicles loan availed by •efendant no.1 with the applicant bank.

¶10

That in order to avail both the vehicles loan facilities, the efendants through their authorized signatories submitted •an Application Form with Board Resolution dated 09.06.2017 nd executed Loan Agreements and defendant no.3 executed greement for Loan and Guarantee along with hypothecation eed of vehicles with the applicant bank. d

¶11

¶12

T.A. No.2858 of 2022

¶13

. That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendants ypothecated commercial vehicles as under:

¶14

Product Name	Registration no.	Engine No.	Chassis No.
TATA 3118	RJ52GA2848	SO6097471E84387885	MAT466602HHE04708
TATA 3118	RJ52GA2851	SO6097471E84387818	MAT466602HHE04706

¶15

I favour of applicant bank purchased out of loan availed by efendant no.1

¶16

It has been submitted that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to adhere to the repayment s hedules and to comply with the terms and conditions despite f several requests and reminders and started defaulting in payment of monthly installments which became overdue to t e applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank calling upon t e defendants to pay the entire outstanding dues but there

¶17

as no response. The applicant bank took possession of the h pothecated vehicle and sold the secured asset namely ATA3118, Registration No.RJ-52GA-2851 for Rs.5,001000/and appropriated in the account and issued post sale notice d ted 03.10.2019 for Rs.6,86,743.49. The applicant bank I sued Loan Recall Notice to clear the outstanding dues in both a counts but they neglected. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶18

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and espite of proper service the defendants have chosen to absent f om the proceedings. As per order dated 24.07.2024, the efendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, idence and affidavit of assets has been filed on behalf of the efendants.

¶19

¶20

T.A. No.2858 of 2022

¶21

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its vidence by way of affidavit of Shri Abhijeet Raj, authorized r-presentative of the applicant bank who has proved the •ocuments as Power of Attorney, Copy of Board Resolution, •an Application, Agreement for Loan and Guarantee, Pre -Sale otice, Valuation Report, Post Sale Notice, Notice of Demand and Termination along with Postal Receipts, Corrigendum otice, Statement of Loan Accounts, Foreclosure Statement and Certificate under Section 2A of Bankers' Books Evidence ct marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/12.

¶22

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments ade in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have

¶23

•een duly approved.

¶24

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and t ere is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant •ank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts

¶25

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

¶26

ORDER

¶27

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.27,27,460.99 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Twenty even Thousand Four Hundred Sixty and Paisa Ninety Nine •nly) as on 03.10.2019 along with pendentelite and future i terest @9.50% per annum with monthly rest from

¶28

¶29

T.A. No.2858 of 2022

¶30

•8.12.2019 till the date of realization, failing which the .foresaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of the ypothecated vehicles namely TATA 3118 having Registration o.RJ-52GA-2848, Engine no. SO6097471E84387885 and chassis no.MAT466602HHE04708. In case of shortfall, the s me shall be recovered from sale of the moveable and i movable properties of defendants. ( I) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent t e Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi. ( II) Parties are directed to appear the Recovery Officer, DRT I Delhi on 04.12.2025. ( V) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be s nt to all concerned free of cost. (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI I ictated and pronounced in open court) I ated: 06.10.2025

Hdfc Bank v. Veena Trans Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Veena Trans Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

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

Punjab National Bank versus Sukhwant Kaur

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Gurpreet Singh

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Surjit Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Sukhwant Singh

State Bank of India versus Jaimas Masih

Icici Bank Limited versus Sanjeev Kumar Gupta