Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Shrey Mittal

DRT17 Jun 2025TA/2874/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by a bank for recovery of an outstanding housing loan amount of Rs. 32.82 lakhs along with interest and costs from the borrower and developer. The defendants were absent, and the bank proved its case through documents.

What did the court decide?

Direct the defendants to pay Rs. 32,82,600 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.75% per annum with monthly rests from 21.03.2020 till realization with costs, recoverable from sale of mortgag

Punjab National Bank versus Shrey Mittal — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.2874 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. 2874 of 2022

¶5

Punjab National Bank (e-Oriental Bank of Commerce) Circle Sastra North Delhi

¶6

Gurudwara Road, Karol Bagh New Delhi-110005

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Shrey Mittal G-1103, Aditya Mega City Vaibhav Khand, Indirapuram Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201014

¶10

Morpheus Developers Pvt. Ltd. Regd. Office:

¶11

House No.1, Shiv Mandir Wall Gali Maujpur, Delhi-110053

¶12

Also at:

¶13

Corporate Office 154, 51 Floor, Tower-A Corenthum Tower, Plot No.A-41 Sector-62, Noida, UP-201301 Defendants

¶14

Present: Shri Vipin Jai, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶15

Date of Institution: 29.05.2020

¶16

Date of Pronouncement: 17.06.2025

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 29.05.2020 before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Praveen Relan, authorized cd

¶19

¶20

T.A. No.2874 of 2022

¶21

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.32,82,600/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Six Hundred only) as on 20.03.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.75% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of its realization and costs.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 vide loan application dated 28.06.2017, the applicant bank sanctioned a Housing Loan of Rs.32,36,000/(Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Thirty Six Thousand only) on 17.07.2017 @8.55% interest per annum with monthly rests along with @2% penal interest for purchase of under construction Flat no.1403, 14th Floor, Bock No.B-5, Morpheus Pratiksha, GH-16A, Sector-01, Greater Noida, UP being constructed by defendant no.2 based on Allotment cum Buyer Agreement dated 28.06.2017.

¶23

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted Loan Application dated 28.06.2017 and executed Agreement of Individual Housing Loan, Tripartite Agreement, Power of Attorney, Undertaking, Common Agreement, Letter for Auto recovery/ Standing Instructions for Existing Accounts, Affidavit with the applicant bank on 18.07.2017. The defendant no.2 issued No Objection to Mortgage in favour of applicant bank on 18.07.2017.

¶24

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage of Flat no.1403, 14th floor, Tower/Block No.B-5, Morpheus Pratiksha, GH-16A, Sector-01,

5d"

T.A. No.2874 of 2022

Greater Noida, UP with the applicant bank on the basis of No Objection to Mortgage issued.

¶29

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 reminders and defaulted in payment of monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 31.12.2018 and issued demand notice on 04.11.2019 to clear the dues but defendants neglected, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶30

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 15.06.2022, the 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.

¶31

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Praveen Relan, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/1, Loan Application Ex.AW-1/2, Sanction Letter Ex.AW-1/3, Allotment cum Buyer Agreement Ex.AW-1/4, Agreement of Individual Housing Loan Ex.AW-1/5, Tripartite Agreement Ex.AW-1/6, Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/7, Undertaking to execute Agreement for Sale Ex.AW-1/8, Common Agreement Ex.AW-1/9, No Objection to Mortgage Ex.AW-1/10, Letter for Auto recovery Ex.AW-1/11, Legal Heir Affidavit Ex.AW-1/12, Copies of Receipts Ex.AW1/13, Legal Notice Ex.AW-1/14, Statement of Account Ex.AW1/15.

¶32

¶33

T.A. No.2874 of 2022

¶34

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.

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

ORDER

¶38

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.32,82,600/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Six Hundred only) as on 20.03.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.75% per annum with monthly rests from 21.03.2020 till its realization with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged Flat no.1403, 14th floor, Block No.B-5, Morpheus Pratiksha, GH-16A, Sector-01, Greater Noida, UP. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶39

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

¶40

¶41

T.A. No.2874 of 2022

¶42

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 18.08.2025.

¶43

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

¶44

_ (GOVIND BALUargrHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶45

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 17.06.2025

¶46

Punjab National Bank v. Shrey Mittal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Shrey Mittal

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

Anish Anakkal Balan versus Idbi Bank

Ms B S Dhatu Pvt. Ltd. Director Dilip Satynarayan Agrawal versus Indian Bank

Jyotsna Chakraborty Das versus Canara Bank

Mammu v versus Punjab National Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Aniraj Chauhan

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Poonam Industries