Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Anju Trading Co.

DRT29 Aug 2026OA/1060/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chandigarh, in an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, allowed the bank's claim for recovery of Rs.20.51 Lakhs with interest. The court proceeded ex parte against defaulting defendants, established the loan and guarantee, and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate and sale of mortgaged land.

What did the court decide?

Recovery application allowed; recovery certificate to be issued; sale of mortgaged land ordered.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Anju Trading Co. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1060/2022 Date of Institution: 20.04.2022 Date of Decision: 29.08.2026

¶4

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Town Hall, Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

M/s Anju Trading Co., Purani Mandi, Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶8

Mrs. Anju Bhandari w/o Sh. Rajiv Bhandari, r/o H.no. 251, Ext. Janipur Colony, Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶9

Mr. Rajiv Bhandari s/o Sh. Dharamvir Bhandari, r/o H.no. 251, Ext. Janipur Colony, Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶10

Mr. Satish Kumar Gupta s/o Lt. Sh. Munshi Ram, r/o H.No.97, Mastgarh, Jammu, Tehsil and District Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶11

Mr. Ajay Bhandari s/o Sh. Dharamvir Bhandari, r/o H.no. 251, Ext. Janipur Colony, Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir.

¶12

……….Defendants

¶13

Advocates

¶14

Mr. Gaurav Thakur proxy counsel for Sh. Mayank Mathur, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶15

Defendants- ex parte vide order dated 23.02.2023 .

¶16

OA for the Recovery of Rs.20,51,183.54p with interest @11.40% per annum with monthly rests from 20.04.2022.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.20,51,183.54p with interest against M/s Anju Trading Co. and others (defendants).

¶19

Bank’s case is that on 08.03.2011, it had granted C.C. Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor defendant No.2 for Business purpose. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 stood as guarantors vide

¶20

¶21

deed of guarantee dated 08.03.2011. The limit was renewed on 27.01.2015 for Rs.10.00 Lacs. Defendant Nos.3 and 5 stood as guarantors vide deed of guarantee dated 30.01.2015. The C.C. Limit was renewed for Rs.10.00Lacs on 25.03.2016. Again on the request of the defendant No.1, the C.C. Limit was enhanced on 18.07.2017, from Rs.10.00 Lacs to Rs.18.00 Lacs. Lastly, on the request of defendant No.1, the C.C. Limit was renewed for Rs.18.00 Lacs on 18.07.2017. Defendant Nos. 3 and 5 stood as guarantors for the subsequent renewal/enhancements. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had hypothecated goods & stocks (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.40% per annum with monthly rests. On 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.20,51,183.54p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶22

On 16.06.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 23.02.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶23

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Umesh Sharma, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-15. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.18.00 Lacs and on 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.20,51,183.54p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.20,51,183.54p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Fifty One Thousand One Hundred Eighty Three and Paise Fifty Four Only) with interest @11.40% per annum with monthly rests from 20.04.2022, till the date of

¶24

¶25

payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant nos. 1 to 3 and 5 would be joint and several. Defendant no.4 would be liable for the C.C. Limit of Rs.10.00Lacs being the guarantor. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶26

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 30.09.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 29.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶27

MANOJ KALRA

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Anju Trading Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Anju Trading Co.

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 Muhammed Sameer

Punjab National Bank versus M S Bishaka International and Ors.

State Bank of India versus M/S Sidhi Vinayak Enterprises

M/S. Dhuria Verka Point versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Gurnam Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Stag Industries