Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Bhupinder Singh and Others

DRT11 Feb 2026OA/104/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed the bank's application for recovery of an NPA of approximately Rs. 36.40 Lakhs. While the dues were affirmed, the court exercised discretion to award simple interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed rate, granting a recovery certificate and directing attachment of assets if dues remain unsatisfied.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 36,39,405.25 plus costs and simple interest @8% p.a.; recovery via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Bhupinder Singh and… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.104/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.02.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.02.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., a body corporate, constituted under the Banking Regulations Act, 1949 having its Head Office at 27BKC, C27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051, and its Branch Office at Kotak Mahindra Bank, 49, JK Tower, Mall Road, Amristar-143001, through its Authorized Representative Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Bhupinder Singh S/o Sh. Surat Singh, R/o H. No. 24, Village Sarai Amant Khan, Tehsil Chabal Kalan, District Tarn Taran143414.

¶10

Smt. Suman @ Suman Uppal W/o Sh. Bhupinder Singh, R/o H. No. 24, Village Sarai Amant Khan, Tehsil Chabal Kalan, District Tarn Taran-143414.

¶11

Sh. Mandeep Singh S/o of Sh. Bhupinder Singh, R/o H. No. 24, Village Sarai Amant Khan, Tehsil Chabal Kalan, District Tarn Taran-143414.

¶12

Sh. Pardeep Singh S/o of Sh. Bhupinder Singh, R/o H. No. 24, Village Sarai Amant Khan, Tehsil Chabal Kalan, District Tarn Taran-143414.

¶13

Sh. Narinder Singh S/o of Sh. Surat Singh R/o H. No. 24, Village Sarai Amant Khan, Tehsil Chabal Kalan, District Tarn Taran-143414.

¶14

Sh. Jagser Singh S/o of Sh. Dara Singh H. No. 29, Village Lahian, Tehsil and District Amritsar-143107.

¶15

………. Defendants

¶16

Advocates:

¶17

Argued by Sh. Rehan Chaudhary, Advocate for Applicant (through VC)

¶18

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 29.07.2025

¶19

¶20

OA NO. 104/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS. BHUPINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.36,39,405.25 (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Thirty Nine Thousand Four Hundred Five and Paise Twenty Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Mr. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 1 to 4 had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.35.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 04.07.2013. Defendant nos. 5 and 6 stood as guarantors.

¶23

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.31.00 Lacs vide Credit Arrangement Letter dated 16.07.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶24

Defendant nos. 1 and 2 mortgaged their immovable property i.e Land Measuring 86Kanal-6Marla situated in Village Sarai Amant Khan, Tehsil Chabal Kalan, District Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 773 dated 23.07.2013, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶25

Documents executed: RBI Notification dated 01.04.2015 on amalgamation of ING Vysya Bank with Kotak Mahindra Bank which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement, Guarantee Bond, both dated 26.07.2013, which is Annexure A4 and A5 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 27.12.2024 along its postal receipts, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Statement of Account which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶26

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.36,39,405.25 which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount,

¶27

¶28

OA NO. 104/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS. BHUPINDER SINGH AND OTHERS therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.07.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel through video conferencing 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 A8 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility 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 loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.36,39,405.25 (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Thirty Nine Thousand Four Hundred Five and Paise Twenty Five Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest 12.45%p.a. plus 2% penal interest with monthly rests from 23.11.2024 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 hypothecated assets/mortgaged properties, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill

¶29

¶30

OA NO. 104/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK VS. BHUPINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶31

in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.36,39,405.25 (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Thirty Nine Thousand Four Hundred Five and Paise Twenty Five Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account 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 assets/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.

¶33

The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶34

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this

¶37

Tribunal on 25.02.2026.

¶38

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.

¶39

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶40

Dated: 11.02.2026.

¶41

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶42

Presiding Officer,

¶43

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Bhupinder Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Bhupinder 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Another

Canara Bank versus Sh. Vishal Soni And Another

Canara Bank versus M/S Teria Machinery Store and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Raj Deepak Fruit Company and Others

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Vijay Kumar and Another

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Mandhar Medical Agency and Others