Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Rajesh Kapoor

DRT21 May 2025TA/607/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's original application filed for recovery of dues amounting to Rs.29,86,000 along with interest resulting from failure to repay a housing loan. The defendants were absent and proceeded ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Direct recovery of Rs.29,86,000 plus interest from sale of mortgaged property and other assets; issuance of Recovery Certificate; hearing to Recovery Officer on 21.07.2025.

Bank of Baroda versus Rajesh Kapoor — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 607 of 2023

¶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.607 of 2023

¶5

Bank of Baroda

¶6

15A, 14, WEA Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1.^{Sh. Rajesh Kapoor s/o Sh.Krishan Lal Kapoor} R/o C-83, Gali No.10 Basti Chinnot, Multani Dhanda Paharganj, New Delhi

¶10

Also at: 9437, Gall No.10 Multani Dhanda, Paharganj New Delhi-110055

¶11

Smt. Manju Kapoor w/o Sh. Rajesh Kapoor R/o C-83, Gali No.10 Basti Chinnot, Multani Dhanda Paharganj, New Delhi-55

¶12

Also at: 9437, Gali no.10 Multani Dhanda, Paharganj New Delhi-110055 Defendants

¶13

Present: Ms Chitra Malhotra, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 20.02.2020

¶14

Date of Pronouncement: 21.15.2025

¶15

T.A. No. 607 of 2023

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-III, Delhi on 20.02.2020 and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Sh. Rahul Pratap, 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.29,86,000/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Six Thousand only) as on 31.01.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest @9% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of realization.

¶18

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendants being co-borrowers vide loan application dated 01.11.2013, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan facility for a sum of Rs.17,20,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Lacs Twenty Thousand only) under Dena LAP Scheme on 07.11.2013 @9% interest in order to purchase flat at 3rd floor of Property no.10, Pocket-4, Sector-22, Rohini, Delhi.

¶19

In order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendants submitted Dena Mortgage Loan Agreement, General Letter of Lien and Set off Borrowing Arrangements, Undertaking Housing Finance, Indemnity Bond, Specific Undertaking, Consent Letter, Declaration and Request for Disbursement in favor of the applicant bank on 07.11.2013.

¶20

In order to secure the loan facility, the defendants submitted and executed declaration of Creation of Equitable Mortgage in respect of property being flat at 3^{rdFloor, Property}

¶21

¶22

T.A. No. 607 of 2023

¶23

No.10, Pocket 4, Sector-22, Rohini, Delhi on 07.11.2013 in favour of applicant bank.

¶24

The defendants executed Letter of Acknowledgement of Debt on 18.04.2015 and 23.05.2017 in favour of applicant bank.

¶25

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant no.1 failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to regularize the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank issued letters dated 10.05.2015, 16.05.2015 and 01.06.2015 and classified the account as NPA on 31.08.2015 as per RBI guidelines but the defendants failed to regularize the account and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶26

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 30.09.2015 was issued to the defendants calling upon them to pay the entire outstanding dues with the applicant bank but the defendants did not clear the dues.

¶27

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 27.03.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed.

¶28

T.A. No. 607 of 2023

¶29

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Rahul Pratap (AW-1), authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as General power of Attorney Ex.AW1/1, Loan Application Ex.AW-1/2, Sanction Letter Ex.AW-1/3, Dena Mortgage Loan Agreement Ex.AW-1/4, General Letter of Lien and Set off Ex.AW-1/5, Undertaking Housing Finance Ex.AW-1/6, Specific Undertaking Ex.AW-1/7, Indemnity Bond Ex.AW-1/8, Consent Letter Ex.AW-1/9, Original Declaration Ex.AW-1/10, Request for Disbursement Ex.AW-1/11, Creation of Equitable Mortgage Declaration Ex.AW-1/12, Letter of Acknowledgement of Debt dated 18.04.2015 & 23.05.2017 Ex.AW-1/13 and Ex.AW-1/14, Reminder Letters Ex.AW-1/15 to Ex.AW-1/17, Notice u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Ex.AN-1/18, Certified Statement of Account Ex.AW-1/19, Interest Certificate Ex.AW-1/20, Certificate u/s 2A of Banker Books Evidence Act Ex.AW-1/21, Sale deed dated 14.11.2013 Ex.AW-1/22.

¶30

10.^{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 sai.ie 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

T.A. No. 607 of 2023

¶34

ORDER

¶35

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.29,86,000/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Six Thousand only) as on 31.01.2020 together with pendentelite and future interest @9% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of realization and costs; failing which the amount shall be recovered from sale of mortgaged property bearing Flat at 3rd Floor of Property no.10, Pocket-4, Sector-22, Rohini, Delhi. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶36

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

¶37

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery} Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 21.07.2025.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 21.05.2025

Bank of Baroda v. Rajesh Kapoor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Rajesh Kapoor

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

Ms Bitts Marketing and Others versus Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited

Hina Agencies versus Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Manoj Kumar

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Ashish Sharma

Canara Bank (E-Syndicate Bank) versus M/S Pret Collections

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Bikramjeet Singh