Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Vaneet Kansal and Others

DRT3 Jan 2026OA/1374/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this ex-parte Original Application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Kotak Mahindra Bank's claim for recovery of approximately Rs. 2.40 crores. The Tribunal decreed joint and several liability of the borrowers for the principal amount and awarded uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.2,40,78,682.13 jointly and severally with costs and simple interest @8% p.a. from date of filing.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Vaneet… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1374/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 03.01.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, a banking company within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 having it’s Registered Office at 27BKC, C27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai400051 and having one out of its many branches located at SCO: 120, 6^th Floor, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, Punjab through Sh. Deepkaran Singh who is presently working as Deputy Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, SCO: 153, 154, 155, 1^st Floor, Sector 9-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh constituted Power of Attorney Holder/ Principal Officer.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Vaneet Kansal S/o Sh. Satish Kansal

¶10

Address : 109, The Mall, Civil Lines, Ludhiana-141003 2^ND Address: Plot No. 281, Industrial Area-A, Ludhiana-141003

¶11

Sh. Rakesh Kansal S/o Sh. Shiv Paul Kansal

¶12

Address : 109, The Mall, Civil Lines, Ludhiana-141003 3. M/s. S.V Exports (through its partners Sh. Vaneet Kansal, Sh.

¶13

Rakesh Kansal and Sh. Sumit Gupta) Address: 109, The Mall, Civil Lines, Ludhiana-141003

¶14

Sh. Sumit Gupta S/o Sh. Sushil Gupta

¶15

Address: 109, The Mall, Civil Lines, Ludhiana-141003

¶16

………. Defendants

¶17

Advocates:

¶18

Argued by Sh. Surinder Nath Sharma, Advocate for Applicant (through VC)

¶19

Defendants already ex parte vide order dated 07.02.2024

¶20

¶21

OA NO.1374/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD VS VANEET KANSAL AND OTHERS

¶22

FINAL ORDER

¶23

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.2,40,78,682.13 (Rupees Two Crore Forty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Thirteen Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Deepkaran Singh, Deputy Manager / Constituted Attorney, of the applicant who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Bank Authority Letter dated 01.04.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶24

The brief facts of the OA are that the Defendants approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan (Loan against Property) of Rs. 6.00 Crores vide Loan Application dated 03.03.2017 which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, the Defendants again approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan (Loan against Property) of Rs. 28.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 20.03.2017 which is Annexure 3 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Term Loans (Loan against Property) of Rs.5,75,19,000.00 and Rs. 28.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 28.03.2017, which are Annexures A4 to A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants no.3 mortgage its immovable property i.e., Plot No. 284-A, Industrial Area- A, R K Road, Near Cheema Chowk, Ludhiana through equitable mortgage of Sale Deed bearing Vasika No. 27911 dated 25.02.2015. Memorandum of Entry dated 10.05.2017 which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Title Search Report dated 26.03.2017, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Scrutiny Report by Advocate dated 30.03.2017, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Title Clearance Sheet dated 29.03.2017, which is Annexure A15 to this OA. As per the OA, the mortgaged property is sold by the applicant in proceedings under SARFAESI Act.

¶25

¶26

OA NO.1374/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD VS VANEET KANSAL AND OTHERS

¶27

Documents executed : Home Equity Loan Agreement (for Rs.5,75,19,000.00) dated 23.03.2017 and Home Equity Loan Agreement (for Rs. 28.00 Lacs) dated 11.05.2017, which are Annexures A6 and A7 to this OA; Disbursement of Request Letter dated 28.03.2017 which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Partnership Deed dated 01.04.2011, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; D.P Note (for Rs. 28.00 Lacs) dated 11.05.2017 which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Declaration dated 10.05.2017 which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Notice dated 01.11.2019 u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, which is Annexure A16 to this OA; Publication of Notice u/s 13(2) dated 04.11.2019 which is Annexure A17 to this OA; OTS (One Time Settlement) proposal dated 24.12.2019 which is Annexure A18 to this OA; Objections by the borrower dated 28.12.2019 which is Annexure A19 to this OA; Reply to Objections by the Bank dated 07.01.2020, which is Annexure A20 to this OA; Publication of notice u/s 13(4) of SARFAESI Act dated 07.01.2020 which is Annexure A21 to this OA; Publication of Sale notice dated 01.01.2022, which is Annexure A22 to this OA; Sale Certificate dated 08.02.2022, which is Annexure A23 to this OA; Report detailing Foreclosure of Loan Account No. 17705982 specifying dues payable by Borrower and report detailing Foreclosure of Loan Account No. 17717123 specifying dues payable by Borrower which is Annexure A24 to this OA; Notice by Advocate dated 20.06.2022 which is Annexure A25 to this OA; Statement of Accounts which are Annexures A26 to A27 to this OA.

¶28

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.2,40,78,682.13, 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.

¶29

¶30

OA NO.1374/2022

¶31

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD VS VANEET KANSAL AND OTHERS

¶32

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 07.02.2024.

¶33

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Deepkaran Singh, Deputy Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited has been filed.

¶34

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶35

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 A27 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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.2,40,78,682.13 (Rupees Two Crore Forty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Thirteen 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.

¶36

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @8.50% with 2% penal interest from 21.06.2022 till the realization.

¶37

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, 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

¶38

¶39

OA NO.1374/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD VS VANEET KANSAL AND OTHERS

¶40

appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both 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.

¶41

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.2,40,78,682.13 (Rupees Two Crore Forty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Thirteen Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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 by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶42

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶43

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶44

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 14.01.2026.

¶45

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 at Camp Court, Ludhiana. Dated: 03.01.2026

¶46

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶47

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Vaneet Kansal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Vaneet Kansal 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Singla Enterprises and Another

Canara Bank versus Messrs Brands Inn and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Piara Singh and Another

Indian Bank versus Ms V.S. Industries

Mohammad Shahzad versus Punjab National Bank

Ms Mansur Ahmad Earth Mover and Contractor versus Union Bank of India