Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S New Khiala Goods Carrier and Others

DRT7 Aug 2026OA/1453/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed Original Application for recovery of loan dues totaling over Rs.63 lakhs. Directed respondents to pay principal amount along with 8% simple interest. Directed issuance of Recovery Certificate and sale of hypothecated vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,97,368.10 and Rs. 36,16,768.00 with costs and 8% interest; Issuance of Recovery Certificate; Recovery from sale of hypothecated vehicles or attachment of personal assets.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S New Khiala Goods Carrier and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1453/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.10.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 07.08.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, having its Registered Office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel - (West), Mumbai - 400013. Also at Plot No 1-15, Sector 101, ALPHA IT City, SAS Nagar (Mohali), through its Authorized Representative Sh. Rajendra Prasad.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s New Khiala Goods Carrier, through its Proprietor Sh. Baljinder Singh, C/o M/s Mansa KGC Transport Office, Opposite Sandeep Petrol Pump, Mansa Kenchian, Mansa (Punjab) – 151505.

¶10

Sh. Baljinder Singh S/o Sh. Buta Singh, R/o Ward No. 2, Professor Colony, Barnala Road, Mansa (Punjab) – 151505.

¶11

Sh. Pargat Singh C/o Sh. Buta Singh, R/o Ward No. 2, Professor Colony, Barnala Road, Mansa (Punjab) – 151505.

¶12

…….. Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Ms. Dipti Toni, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) None for defendants (Already ex-parte vide order dated 29.11.2025).

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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.64,14,136.10 (Rupees Sixty Four Lacs Fourteen Thousand One Hundred Thirty Six and Paise Ten Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Authorized Representative of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 21.08.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

2 OA NO.1453/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS M/S NEW KHIALA GOODS CARRIER AND OTHERS

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 2 & 3 approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility for purchase of Commercial Vehicle and its body of Rs.41,00,000.00 vide Commercial Loan Application Form dated 12.05.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

Thereafter, the defendant no. 2 a pproached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility for purchase of Commercial Vehicle of Rs.37,00,000.00 vide Commercial Loan Application Form dated 24.01.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA.

¶20

Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 and defendant no.2 in his individual capacity a pproached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility for purchase of Commercial Vehicle of Rs.38,24,827.00 and Term Loan Facility of Rs.6,02,302.00 for its body vide Commercial Loan Application Form dated 07.06.2024, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan Facility I for purchase of Commercial Vehicle of Rs.33,25,428.00 and Term Loan Facility II of Rs.5,03,853.00 for its body and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant nos. 2 & 3 vide Agreement for Loan and Guarantee dated 28.05.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Thereafter, t he applicant sanctioned the Term Loan Facility III for purchase of Commercial Vehicle of Rs.36,27,740.00 and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant nos. 2 & 3 vide Agreement for Loan and Guarantee dated 01.03.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this O A. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. Thereafter, T he applicant sanctioned the Term Loan Facility IV for purchase of Commercial Vehicle of Rs.38,24,827.00 and Term Loan Facility V of Rs.6,02,302.00 for its body and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants v ide Agreement for Loan and Guarantee dated 11.07.2024, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. 4. Defendant no. 2 hypothecated his movable assets i.e.,

¶22

3 OA NO.1453/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS M/S NEW KHIALA GOODS CARRIER AND OTHERS

¶23

(i) Commercial Vehicle namely TATA SIGNA 5530 along with its body bearing Registration No. PB03BJ6169, Chassis No. MAT828024N2D09329, Engine No. 02122D64210093 vide Registration Certificate filed on 20.01.2026 in compliance of order dated 20.12.2025. (ii) Commercial Vehicle namely TATA SIGNA 5530 bearing Registration No. PB03BL8035, Chassis No. MAT828024P3B05241, Engine No. 7B6A300D02132B64270976 vide Virtual Registration Certificate filed on 20.01.2026 in compliance of order dated 20.12.2025. Defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 hypothecated its movable asset i.e., (i) Commercial Vehicle namely TATA SIGNA 5530 along with its body bearing Registration No. PB19W8035, Chassis No. MAT828045R2F10726, Engine No. B6.7B62300D02142F64389689 vide Virtual Registration Certificate filed on 20.01.2026 in compliance of order dated 20.12.2025. Documents executed: Statement of Accounts along with certificates, which are Annexures A8 to A12 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 22.09.2025, along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A13 to A16 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.64,14,136.10, 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 29.11.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Authorized Representativ e, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

4 OA NO.1453/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS M/S NEW KHIALA GOODS CARRIER AND OTHERS

¶25

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant 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 A16 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant nos. 2 & 3 a pproached applicant for availing of Term Loan Facilities I & II, which were granted to them, the defendant no. 2 a pproached applicant for availing of Term Loan Facility III, which was granted to him, defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor and the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 and defendant no. 2 in his individual capacity a pproached applicant for availing of Term Loan Facilities IV & V, 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.27,97,368.10 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Eight and Paise Ten Only), along with interest from the defendant nos. 2 & 3, jointly and severally and Rs.36,16,768.00 (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Sixteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Eight 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. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.03%p.a. till the realization.

¶26

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 vehicles, 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

¶27

5 OA NO.1453/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS M/S NEW KHIALA GOODS CARRIER AND OTHERS

¶28

just and appropriate to grant simple interest @8.00%p.a. in 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.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant nos. 2 & 3 are liable to pay to the applicant sum of Rs.27,97,368.10 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Eight and Paise Ten Only), jointly and severally and the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant sum of Rs.36,16,768.00 (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Sixteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Eight Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in 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 vehicles of defendant nos. 1 & 2 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.

¶30

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 24.08.2026. 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: 07.08.2026

¶31

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶32

Presiding Officer,

¶33

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S New Khiala Goods Carrier and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S New Khiala Goods Carrier 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Indian Bank versus Sh. Deepak Sharma and Another

State Bank of India versus M/S Mech Tech Engineers and Anotehr

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Mahadev Enterprises and Others

Yes Bank Limited versus M/S Gabria Hp Centre and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Abhishek Sharma and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Muglani enterprises and Others