Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Mrs. Firdousa Akhtar

DRT20 Mar 2026OA/1548/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. to recover ₹26,81,825.19 with interest from the borrower and guarantors, who were proceeding ex parte. The loan was secured by hypothecated vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; recovery of Rs. 26,81,825.19 with interest granted; recovery certificate issued; remanded to Recovery Officer for sale of hypothecated vehicles.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Mrs. Firdousa Akhtar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1548 of 2022 Date of Institution: 09.06.2022 Date of Decision: 20.03.2026

¶4

Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. having its branches all over India and a branch at Khanabal, Anantnag, Kashmir and Akingam, Anantnag, J&K.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Mrs. Firdousa Akhtar w/o Khurshid Ahmad Gassi, r/o Lidder Matoo, Khanabal, Anantnag, J&K.

¶8

Mr. Khurshid Ahmad Gassi s/o Mohd. Shafi Gassi, r/o Lidder Matoo, Khanabal, Anantnag, J&K.

¶9

Mr. Muzaffar Ahmad Gassi s/o Mohd. Shafi Gassi, r/o Lidder Matoo, Khanabal, Anantnag, J&K.

¶10

Mr. Bilal Ahmad Gassi s/o Late Abdul Rashid Ghasin r/o Khanabal, Anantnag, Kashmir, J&K.

¶11

……….Defendants

¶12

Advocates

¶13

Sh. Gaurav Thakur, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte .

¶14

OA for the Recovery of ₹26,81,825.19p with interest @11.15% per annum with monthly rests from 09.06.2022.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹26,81,825.19p with interest against Firdousa Akhtar and others (defendants).

¶17

Bank’s case is that on 12.09.2017, it had granted a loan of ₹18.00Lacs to defendant no.1 in the form of Vehicle Loan. Defendant nos. 2 and 4 stood as the guarantors for the loan of ₹18.00Lacs. On 17.01.2018, bank granted another vehicle loan of ₹20.00Lacs to Defendant no.1. Defendant nos. 2 and 3 stood as the guarantors for the

¶18

¶19

loan of ₹20.00Lacs. To secure the loans, Defendant no. 1 had hypothecated vehicles (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loans were chargeable to different rates of interest. On 31.03.2022, a sum of ₹26,81,825.19p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶20

On 28.09.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 21.03.2024, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶21

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Umesh Sharma, Authorised Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-10.

¶22

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 loans under different schemes and on 31.03.2022, a sum of ₹26,81,825.19p (₹10,61,892.14p in Vehicle Loan-Khanabal & ₹16,19,933.05p in Vehicle Loan- Akingam) was due.

¶23

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹26,81,825.19p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Eighty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Five and Nineteen Paise Only) with interest @11.15% per annum with monthly rests from 09.06.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant nos. 1 and 2 would be joint and several whereas the liability of Defendant nos.3 and 4 would be limited to the extent of amount due in Vehicle Loan (Akingam) and Vehicle Loan (Khanabal) respectively. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated vehicles fully detailed in para No.3A

¶24

¶25

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.

¶27

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 29.04.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the hypothecated vehicles as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶28

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶29

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 20.03.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶30

Amanpreet (Law Researcher)

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Mrs. Firdousa Akhtar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Mrs. Firdousa Akhtar

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 M/s Arvind and Sons Ksk

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Kheta Singh

State Bank of India versus Sivaraj

Smt Veena Jain versus City Union Bank Limited

Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank) versus Rachpal Kaur @ Rashpal Kaur

Smt Lavina Murarka and Anr. versus Axis Bank