Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Irfan and Others — Cheque Dishonour | DRT (2026)

Home
DRT
2026
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Irfan and OthKotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Irfan and Others

Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Irfan and Others

DRT29 Aug 2026OA/1025/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

[null]

What did the court decide?

[null]

What the court decided

AI extract

A

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1025/2026

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.07.2026

DATE OF DECISION: 29.08.2026

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. a Body Corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 and having branches all over India and one of its Branch Offices situated at SCO No.131-132-133, 2^nd Floor, Apra Tower, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana - 141001 through its Manager, Sh. Rakesh Kumar.

……..Applicant

Versus

Sh. Irfan S/o Sh. Majeed, R/o H. No. 5, Village Illewal, Post Office Gwalthai, Tehsil Shri Naina Devi Ji, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh - 174201.

Sh. Majid Ahmed S/o Sh. Maghi Khan, R/o H. No. 5, Village Illewal, Post Office Gwalthai, Tehsil Shri Naina Devi Ji, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh - 174201.

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act19
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act2002

Parties & counsel

AI extract

applicant
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
respondent
Sh. Irfan S/o Sh. Majeed
respondent
Sh. Majid Ahmed S/o Sh. Maghi Khan
respondent
Sh. Hakam Khan S/o Sh. Maghi Khan

Coram

AI extract

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: DRT
Decided on: 29 Aug 2026 · August
Case no.: OA/1025/2026
CNR: 040330015652026

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Mridulesh Kumar Singh

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Honey Garments and Another
28 Aug 2026
Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Dhillon Tile Industries and Others
28 Aug 2026
Bank of India versus Sh. Dharminder Singh and Another
28 Aug 2026
Bank of Baroda versus M/S Amaya Enterprises and Another
29 Aug 2026

Cite this judgement

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Irfan and Others, OA/1025/2026 (DRT), decided on 29 August 2026.

The Debt Recovery Tribunals publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act19
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act2002

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

Mridulesh Kumar Singh

Parties & counsel

Outcome

[null]

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

[null]

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

Sh. Hakam Khan S/o Sh. Maghi Khan, R/o H. No. 5, Village Illewal, Post Office Gwalthai, Tehsil Shri Naina Devi Ji, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh - 174201.

…….. Defendants

Advocates:

Argued by Sh. Rahul Garg, Advocate for the applicant

None for defendants (Already ex-parte vide order dated 25.08.2026).

FINAL ORDER

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.29,46,411.53 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Forty Six Thousand Four Hundred Eleven and Paise Fifty Three Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh.

2 OA NO.1025/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. VS SH. IRFAN AND OTHERS

Rakesh Kumar, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 29.11.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 1 & 2 approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility for purchase of commercial vehicle of Rs.42,00,000.00 vide Individual Customer Relation Form dated 15.06.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan Facilities for purchase of commercial vehicle and its body of Rs.36,42,152.00 and Rs.2,50,000.00 and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants vide Loan cum Guarantee Agreement dated 25.06.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this O A. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. 4. Defendant no. 1 hypothecated his movable asset i.e., Commercial vehicle namely TATA SIGNA 5530, bearing Chassis No. MAT828048RAE07029, Engine No. 42095464976, Registration No. PB65BH5112 vide Tax Invoice dated 13.06.2024 and Virtual Registration Certificate, which are Annexures A3 & A4 to this OA. Documents executed: Demand Promissory Note, Power of Attorney, dated 25.06.2024, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA; Legal Notice, dated 20.05.2026, along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Statement of Accounts along with certificates, which are Annexures A9 & A10 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.29,46,411.53, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 25.08.2026.

3 OA NO.1025/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. VS SH. IRFAN AND OTHERS

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. has been filed.

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant nos. 1 & 2 a pproached applicant for availing of loan facilities which were granted to them, defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, loan accounts were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.29,46,411.53 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Forty Six Thousand Four Hundred Eleven and Paise Fifty Three Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24.00%p.a. with monthly rests, in both the loan accounts from 20.05.2026 till the realization.

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the hypothecated asset, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the

4 OA NO.1025/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. VS SH. IRFAN AND OTHERS

loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant sum of Rs.29,46,411.53 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Forty Six Thousand Four Hundred Eleven and Paise Fifty Three Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated commercial vehicle of defendant no. 1 in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of .

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 14.09.2026.

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

Dated: 29.08.2026

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Mridulesh Kumar Singh

Topic

Cheque Dishonour

Bench

Mridulesh Kumar Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Gurnam Singh and Another

29 Aug 2026

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Adil Nurhan and Others

29 Aug 2026