Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Smt.Laxmi Devi

DRT12 Aug 2025TA/3074/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed the original application for recovery of dues under Section 19 of RDBFI Act, 1993. Defenders defaulted on housing loan installments and did not appear. The decree directs payment of the principal sum along with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Order allowing the original application and directing defendants to pay Rs. 15,46,810/- with interest and costs within 30 days; directing issuance of recovery certificate.

Central Bank of India versus Smt.Laxmi Devi — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 3074 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.3074 of 2022

¶5

Central Bank of India
Kheri Road, Nehar Par,
Faridabad, Haryana- 121002 Applicant
Versus
1.^{Smt. Lakshmi Devi} W/o Shr. Prem Singh House No. 24- A, Main Idgah Road, Delhi GPO, North Delhi-110006
2.^{M/S Subhkamna Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.} (Through its Directors) Sh. Harish Kumar S/o Shr. Ghanshyam Dutt Having Regd. Office at: 197- E, Pocket- IV, Mayur Vihar, Phase- I, Delhi- 110091 Defendants
Present: Mr. Sarthak Bhatia, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 20.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 12.08.2025

¶6

FINAL ORDER

¶7

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-III, Delhi on 20.07.2018 and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi, through Sh. T. C. Ahuja, authorized

¶8

T.A. No. 3074 of 2022

¶9

representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a surrrof Rs.15,46,810/^- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs Forty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Ten only), along with pendente lite and future interest ©10.25% per annum with monthly rests plus ©2% penal interest from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs. Further, the name of Sh. Lakshmi Chand Kadam was substituted as authorized representative in place of Shr. T. C. Ahuja erstwhile AR for the applicant bank.

¶10

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant vide their loan application dated 25.04.2013, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan facility vide sanction letter dated 27.04.2013 for a sum of Rs.13,00,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lacs only) @10.25% interest per with monthly rests to be repayable in 192 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.17,605/- each in order to purchase a property being Apartment No. 804, admeasuring 506 sq. ft. situated at Techomes ©Loginn at Plot No. GH- 05/B, Sector- 137, Noida, Uttar Pradesh which was allotted to Defendant No. 1 by Defendant No. 2 through the Allotment-Cum Flat Buyer Agreement dated 12.04.2013, against equitable mortgage of a property.

¶11

In order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant submitted loan application dated 25.04.2013 and executed Sanction Letter dated 27.04.2013, Loan Agreement, Consent Clause, Letter of Deposit of advance Cheques, Letter of Waiver, Letter of Interest, Letter of Undertaking dated 27.04.2013 Agreement to Mortgage dated 12.04.2013 and Tripartite Agreement dated 29.04.2013.

¶12

CC(`--

¶13

T.A. No. 3074 of 2022

¶14

That in order to secure the housing loan facility, the efendant created equitable mortgage of property being partment No. 804, admeasuring 506 sq. ft. situated at echomes @Loginn at Plot No. GH- 05/B, Sector- 137, Noida, Uttar Pradesh with the applicant bank on 12.04.2013.

¶15

As per Tripartite Agreement dated 29.04.2013 executed by defendant with the applicant bank, it was agreed that in the event of cancellation of the said booking by any default committed by the borrower or in the event of failure of the builder to complete the project, it shall refund to the applicant bank forthwith the entire amount received by the defendant.

¶16

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the loan facilities, the defendants 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 accounts as NPA on 30.11.2017 in terms of RBI guidelines but defendants failed to regularize the accounts inspite of assurances made hence the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues.

¶17

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and

¶18

1. despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 06.01.2020, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement,

¶19

T.A. No. 3074 of 2022

¶20

vidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the efendant.

¶21

^� In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has

¶22

executed various documents as Power of Attorney, AllotmentCum Flat Buyer Agreement, Loan Application Letter, Sanction Letter, Tripartite Agreement, Permission to Mortgage vide Letter, Loan Agreement, Consent Clause, Letter of Deposit of advance Cheques, Letter of Waiver, Letter of Interest, Letter of Undertaking and Statement of Accounts duly certified under Bankers Books Evidence Act as Annexure "A-1" to Annexure "A-14".

¶23

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 approved.

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

T.A. No. 3074 of 2022

¶27

ORDER

¶28

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the

¶29

pplicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, sum of Rs.15,46,810/- (Rupees Fifteen Lacs Forty Six

¶30

housand Eight Hundred Ten only), along with pendente lite

¶31

and future interest ©10.25% per annum with monthly rests lus @2% penal interest from the date of filing of this pplication till the date of realization and costs; failing which

¶32

he amount shall be recovered from sale of mortgaged property

¶33

being Apartment No. 804, admeasuring 506 sq. ft. situated at echomes @Loginn at Plot No. GH- 05/B, Sector- 137, Noida,

¶34

Uttar Pradesh. 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 15.10.2025.

¶37

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

¶38

(GOVIND BA PRE	LLABH SHARMA) SIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI
(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 12.08.2025

Central Bank of India v. Smt.Laxmi Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Smt.Laxmi Devi

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

Mr Tryambak So Ramrao Deshmukh Prop of Mahalaxmi Electrotech Services versus Nirmal Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus Surinder Kumar

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Rajiv Kumar

Bank of Baroda versus Rakesh Singh

Canara Bank versus M/S Rajat Enterprises

Central Bank of India versus M/S P. Pure and Admire