Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Kashmir Singh and Others

DRT6 Jan 2026OA/1037/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against defendants for recovery of outstanding loan dues totaling Rs. 27,24,832.00. The court approved the claim, adjusted the interest rate to 8% p.a. despite higher claims, and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants liable to pay Rs. 27,24,832.00 with simple interest at 8% p.a.; enforcement under SARFAESI Act permitted.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Kashmir Singh and Others — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1037/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 10.08.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.01.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Ltd, a banking company, carrying on the banking business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013 and Branch Offices, amongst other places one at Patran, District Patiala, Punjab, through Mrs. Pooja Arora, Manager and holder of an attorney from the Applicant.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Kashmir Singh S/o Sh. Joginder Singh, R/o Kahangarh, Sher Singh Colony, Patran, Patiala - 147105.

¶10

Smt. Karamjeet Kaur W/o Sh. Kashmir Singh, R/o Kahangarh, Sher Singh Colony, Patran, Patiala - 147105.

¶11

Smt. Gurpreet Kaur W/o Sh. Bakshinder Singh, R/o Kahangarh, Sher Singh Colony, Patran, Patiala - 147105.

¶12

Sh. Karamjit Singh S/o Sh. Sukhwant Singh, R/o Banwala, Shutrana, Patran, Patiala - 147105

¶13

………. Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Sumeet Sehgal, Advocate proxy for Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for the applicant

¶16

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 21.10.2025

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under

¶19

Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.27,24,832.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Mrs. Pooja Arora, Manager of

¶20

¶21

OA NO.1037/2024 HDFC BANK LTD VS. KASHMIR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶22

the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 16.01.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the Defendant nos. 1 to 3 approached the applicant for the grant of Agriculture CC Limit, Agriculture Overdraft Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs and Farm Development Loan (FDL-Dropline OD) of Rs.2.00 Lac of vide Loan application dated 16.07.222 which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 4 stood as

¶23

guarantor.

¶24

The applicant sanctioned the of Agriculture CC Limit of Rs.17.84 Lacs, Agriculture Overdraft Limit of Rs.4.00 Lacs, Farm Development Loan (FDL-Dropline OD) of Rs.2.24 Lacs vide Sanction letters dated 07.09.2022, which are Annexures A3 to A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants had mortgage their immovable properties i.e., land measuring 80K-00M i.e., 10.10 Acres situated at Village Kanianwali, Tehsil and District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 08.09.2022, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶25

Documents executed: Agreement for Dropline Overdraft cum hypothecation cum guarantee, Agreement for Overdraft/Cash credit cum guarantee cum hypothecation, all dated 07.9.2022 which are Annexures A6 to A8 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 20.07.2024 and Postal Receipts dated 23.07.2024 which are Annexures A10 to A14 to this OA; Statement of Accounts, which are Annexures A15 to A17 to this OA.

¶26

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.27,24,832.00, 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.

¶27

¶28

OA NO.1037/2024 HDFC BANK LTD VS. KASHMIR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶29

The defendant was served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 21.10.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Mrs. Pooja Arora, Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd., has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel 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 A17 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which was granted to them 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.27,24,832.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Two Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.00%p.a. with half yearly rest in CC Limit, @12.00%p.a. with half yearly rest in OD and FDL from 01.04.2024 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, 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

¶30

¶31

OA NO.1037/2024 HDFC BANK LTD VS. KASHMIR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶32

Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.27,24,832.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Two Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all 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/mortgaged properties of the defendants 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.

¶34

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 19.01.2026. 15. 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: 06.01.2026.

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶36

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Kashmir Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Kashmir Singh and Others

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Kuldeep Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus M/S the Urban Beauty House and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Gurcharan Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S v K Creations and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Gurpal Singh and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Kuldip Singh and Others