Allowed

Federal Bank v. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Thakran

DRT21 Aug 2025TA/928/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery tribunal adjudicated on a suit for recovery of dues filed by Federal Bank Ltd against borrowers. The tribunal resolved disputes regarding blank signatures, cause of action, and interest rates by examining the record. The applicant successfully proved its case, and the court allowed the application for recovery.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 28,11,609/- along with cost and interest @12.75% within 30 days; Recovery Certificate issued.

Federal Bank versus Shri Sanjeev Kumar Thakran — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

¶2

Before SUSHIL^{KUMAR RASTOGI,Presiding Officer} Debts RecovetY^{Tribunal-Il' Delhi}

¶3

TAl928l2022

¶4

THE FEDERAL^{BANKLITJ.ITED VS SHRI SANJEE\I KUMAR} THAKRAN^{& ORS.}

¶5

Reserued on 224.O7'2025 Pronounced^{on : 21.08'2025}

¶6

The Federal^{aank Limlted}

¶7

Applicant bank

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Shri Sanjeev^KumarThakran

¶10

Smt. Anju^Rani

¶11

(Since deceased,^{throughhis followinglegal heirs} impleaded^{videorder dated07'07'2017)}

¶12

(i). Shri Sanjeev^{KumarThakran- Husband}

¶13

(ii). Ishant^Kumar -^{Minor Son}

¶14

ffiroug|'^{his father and natural guardian)- Defendants}

¶15

Present: Shri Mukesh^{Aggarwal,Counsel appears for} applicant^bank' OeienOans^{are expafte since 01'07'2025}

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original^{application has been frled by the} applicant^{bank, on 01.11'2013 throughSh' Pramod} Kumar T^{V, Senior Manager, Principal Officer and} Constituted^{Attorneyof the applicant bank' under} Section^{19 of the RDB Act, 1993againstthe defendants} for recovery^{of a sum of Rs'28,11,609/- together with} cost, charges^{and pendenteliite and future interest} @L6.75o/op'a'^{from the date of filling of this O'A till the} date of^{realization in full'}

¶18

¶19

TANOl928l2022²

¶20

The brief^{facts of the case are that atthe} request ofdefendants,^{the applicant bank sanctioneda} Housing Loan^{Facilityof Rs'16,96,5781'on 04'10'2008} for^purchase of^{immovable property being Entire First} Floor without^{roof rights of built up property bearing} No.15, measuring^{60.00 Sq. mtrs, in Pocket-3, Sector-} 24, Rohini, Delhi-l10085'^{The defendantsexecuted all} necessary loaning^{documentson 04'10'2008'The} defendants^{created equitable mortgaged their} aforesaid^{property by deposit of original title deeds of} the property^{with an intention to create mortgagein} favour of the^{applicantbank on 30'12'2008'It is} submifted^{that during the pendency of the O'A, the} defendant^no.2 /Smt'^{Anju Rani was died and the LRs} of deceased^{defendant/ Smt. AnjuRaniwere impleaded} in the^presentOA.

¶21

It is^{fufther submitted that the defendants} enjoyed and^{utilized the Loan facility, but failed to} maintain the^{financial discipline and failed to repay the} due amounts'^{The applicant bank requested the} defendants^{to regularize the loan accountby visitsand} letters, but^{there was no response from the} defendants,^{hencethe account was classifled as NPA} the aPPlicant^bank dated 30.09.2009'^Therefore, 17.07.2073 to^the served a^{Legal Noticedated} defendants^{but failed to recoverthe same' Thus'the} present O.AffA is^{preferredby the applicant bank to} recover its^dues.

¶22

4 On notice by^{this Tribunal, the defendants put} appearance^{throughcounsel and filed written} statement^{and evidence.Thereafter, the defendants} 4).^"

¶23

TANO/92812022³

¶24

failed to^put appearanceⁱⁿ the^{mafter, despite} issuance of default^{notice. Accordingly,the defendants} were proceeded against^{exparteon 01.07.2025.}

¶25

In their^{written statementthe defendantshave} denied the facts^{mentioned in the OA. It is submitted} that the applicant bank^{has not filed the complete} statement of^{account as requiredas per the rules. It is} fufther submitted that^{the applicant banVfinancial} institution^{generally obtain blank documents from the} borrowers, those^{are then later on filedup without the} consent or^{knowledge of the borrower,the same is the} position in the instant^{case also. The documentshave} been filed up^{later oh, thus making material} alternations in^{the documents. These documentsare} void ab-initio in the^{eyes of law. The contract} documents^{signed by the defendants,in blank, were} for the defendants^{to take-or-leave'Because of the} monopolistic or^{near monopolisticposition of the} applicant bank. It^{is furthersubmitted that the} applicant bank^{has charged from the defendants illegal} and excessive^{rate of interest in violation of RBI} guidelines. The application^{thereforein fact not only} lacks cause of action^{but is deliberately vagueand} incapable of^{bearing adjudicated upon. The same be} therefore dismissed^{in limine. It is submittedthat the} original application^{filed by the applicant banks are on} different causes^{of action for the different allegedloans} granted to the defendants.^{As such the original} application^{is barred by Rule 10 of the Debt Recovery} Tribunal^{(Procedure)Rules 1993' The original} application^{has not been signed, verified and instituted} ot.

¶26

TANO1928/2022⁴

¶27

by a duly authorized^{and competent person'As} such, the application^{is liable to be rejected on this} ground alone. It is further submitted^{that the statement} of account filed^{is against the principles of natural} justices and opposed to^{public policyas the same has} been filed against^{the judgment passed by the Honble} Supreme Court^{of India in the matterof Ravinder Singh} vs Central Bank of India.^{Therefore,the statementof} account cannot^{be taken on record and the applicant} bank be directed^{to file the statement of account as per} the^{judgment passed by the Hontle Supreme Court of} India in the aforesaid^{matter. The defendants reserve} their rights to^{fileamendedwritten} statemenVadditional^{writtenstatement as and when} the revised statement^{of account by the applicant bank'} The defendants are^{also moving separate application} for directing the^{bank to file the statementof account} as per the^{aforesaid judgment. Moreover,the} statement of account^{is not ceftified as per latest} amended of^{the Bankers Book of EvidenceAct and as} such the original^{applicationis liable to be dismissedon} this^ground alone.^{It is prayed that this Hontle Tribunal} may dismiss the^{original applicationof the applicant} bank.

¶28

Both the^{partieshave filed theirrespective} evidence.

¶29

Heard the^{Ld' Counsel of the applicant bankand} perused the record.

¶30

'. r"

¶31

TANOl928l2022⁵

¶32

The^{first contention of the defendant is that} the applicant^{bank has not filed the complete statement} of account^{as required as per the rules'In this regard} I have^{perused the record. On perusal of the record, it} is clear that^{the applicant bank has filed the complete} statement of^{account' Therefore,there is no force in} the contention^{of the defendant.}

¶33

The^{next contentionofthe defendantsis that the} applicant^{bank has obtained signatures on the blank} proformas and therefore,^{the said papercannot be} relied upon.^{But the contentionof the defendantshas} no force. The^{defendantsare well educated person'} therefore,^{it cannotbe presumedthat theyhave signed} the^{papers without going through the conditionsof the} sanction letter.^{Further, the defendant has never filed} any complaint^{before the competentforum in this} regard. Therefore,^{the contention of the defendant has} no force.

¶34

The^{next contention of the defendantis that the} applicant^{bank has chargedexorbitant rate of interest} which is against^{the judgment given by the Hontle} Supreme^{Court in Central Bank of India Vs' Ravindra} and Ors.^{On the other hand, the Ld' counselof the bank} has submitted^{that the interest has been chargedas} per agreement^{betweenthe parties' In this regard I} have^{gone through the record' From perusalof the} statement of^{accountit is clear that the applicant bank} is charging^{rate of interest as per agreement'} Therefore, it^{cannot be said that the applicant bank is} 9\

¶35

TANOls28l2O22⁶

¶36

charging^{exorbitant rate of interest' Therefore' the} contention^{of the defendant has no force'}

¶37

The^{next contention of the defendant in the} written statement^{is that the OA has been filed without} any cause^{of action. In this regard I have gone through} the record.^{From perusalof the record' it is clearthat} the applicant^{bank has issued legal notice to the} defendant^{to repay the amount due and the defendant} has failed^{to repay the entire due amountand therefore'} the cause^{of action to file the OA has dulyariseand} therefore,^{the contentionofthe defendanthas no force'}

¶38

The^{next contention of the defendant is that the OA} has not been^{fited by the competent person who is} authorizedtoverifoandfilethepresentoA.Fromperusal of the^{record, it is clear that the applicant bank has filed} relevant documents^{regardingthe authorization of Sh'} Pramod^{Kumar TV, Senior Manager, Principal Officer and} Constitution^{Attorneyto sign, verify and institutethe OA} before^{this Tribunal. Therefore, there is no groundto} reject the^{OA on this ground'}

¶39

From^{perusal of the entire evidence'it is clear that} the defendants^{have failed to prove their case as} claimed^{in the written statement'On the other hand'} the applicant^{bank has proved his case against the} defendants^{and therefore,the defendants are liable to} pay^jointty and^{severally the amount claimed by the} applicant^{bank and the OMIA of the applicant bank is} liable to be allowed. 4)<,-

¶40

TANOl928l2022

¶41

¶42

In the light of the^{above discussions,thepresentTA} deserues to be^allowed.

¶43

ORDER

¶44

I hereby allow^{this T.A. of the Applicant Bank and} direct the defendant^{nos.1 & 2 (i) and 2 (ii) to pay jointly} and severally to^{the applicant bank within 30 days from} today, a sum of^{Rs.28,11,609/- along with cost, expenses} and interest @12.75o/o^{from the date of filing of this O'A} which has become^{TA till the date of realization' However,} the liability of^{LRs of deceased Smt. Anju Rani is limited} to the extent of^{property/assetsinherited by themfrom} deceased Smt.^{Anju Rani' The defendant no'l/Shri} Sanjeev Kumar^{Thakranas LR of deceased SmL Anju Rani} is also liable to^{pay to the applicant bankthe amount to} the extent of^{assetsinherited by him from deceasedSmt'} Anju Rani.

¶45

In case^{of failure to deposit the above amountwithin} the stipulated^{period, the same shall be recoveredfrom} the sale of the^{mortgagedpropefi bearing no' Entire First} Floor without^{roof rights of Builtupproperty bearing} No.15, measuring^{60.00 Sq. mtrs, in Pocket-3, Sector-24,} Situatedⁱⁿ the^{Lay-out plan of Rohini Residential Scheme,} Rohini, Delhi-110085..In^{case of short fall, the same shall} be recovered^{from the sale of personal movable and} immovable^{assets of the defendantnos'1 & 2 (i) and 2} (ii).

¶46

Recovery^{Certificatebe issued fofthwith andbe} sent to Recovery^{Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il,} Delhi'

¶47

*--

¶48

TANOl928l2022⁸

¶49

The registry of this Tribunal^{is hereby directed} to issue free copy of the order and^send the^{same to} both the^parties.

¶50

Parties are direct to appear^{before the Ld'} Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhion 22.t0.2025.^Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to records. <-\ Date: 21.08.2025 (susHrl KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶51

This^judgement has been signed, dated^and pronounced in open coutt.

¶52

e"\ Date :21.08.2025 (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶53

Federal Bank v. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Thakran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Thakran

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