Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Amar Dass

DRT14 Sept 2026OA/1573/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A debt recovery tribunal allowed a bank’s application for recovery of a cash-credit debt from the borrower and guarantor. The bank proved the facility, security documents, recall notice, and outstanding amount through documentary evidence and the authorised officer’s affidavit. The defendants were held jointly and severally liable, with recovery permitted against the secured assets and their personal movable and immovable properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,98,099.95 with interest at 12% per annum and half-yearly rests from 08.10.2024, with costs, jointly and severally from both defendants; recovery permitted against the hypothecated assets, mortgaged land, and defendants’ personal movable and immovable properties.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Amar Dass — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1573/2024

¶4

Date of Institution: 08.10.2024 Date of Decision: 14.09.2026

¶5

HDFC Bank Limited, Branch at HDFC Bank House Plot No. 1-15, Sector 101 Alpha, IT City, Mohali, also at HDFC Bank Branch, Reckong PEO. Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Amar Dass S/o Nakal PO Shongthong, Teh Kalpa, Tangling (41/2), Distt Kinnaur, HP.

¶8

Raj Kumar S/o Amar Singh PO Kalpa, Teh Kalpa, Kalpa 20/1, Distt Kinnaur.

¶9

…Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Mr. Abhishek Garg, proxy Counsel for Mr. Rajesh Jangra, Counsel for the Applicant Bank along with Mr. Deepak Kumar, Legal Manager. Defendants – ex parte .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.27,98,099.95p with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 08.10.2024.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

On 08.10.2024, HDFC Bank Limited filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.27,98,099.95p with interest against Sh. Amar Dass and another (defendants).

¶15

Defendant No.1 is the borrower and defendant No.2 is the guarantor. Bank’s case is that on 11.11.2014, it had granted a Cash Credit facility of Rs.10.25 lacs to defendant No.1 for agricultural purpose. To secure the facility, defendant No.1 had hypothecated assets and mortgaged his land (fully detailed in Annexure A-4 and para No.5.7 of the application, respectively). Defendant No.2 stood as Guarantor for

¶16

¶17

the above facility vide Guarantee Deed dated 29.12.2014. The facility was chargeable to interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 23.08.2024, Bank had issued recall notice to the defendants. On 26.08.2024, a sum of Rs.27,98,099.95p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 01.11.2024, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 05.02.2026, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶19

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized Officer, along with the loan and security documents.

¶20

I have perused the evidence on the record. Mr. Deepak Kumar, Legal Manager is present along with the original documents which have been perused by me. The same have been returned to him after perusal. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced a Cash Credit facility of Rs.10.25 lacs and on 26.08.2024, a sum of Rs.27,98,099.95p was due.

¶21

Accordingly, the application of the Bank for the recovery of Rs.27,98,099.95p (Rupees Twenty-Seven Lacs Ninety-Eight Thousand Ninety-Nine and Paise Ninety-Five Only) with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 08.10.2024, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated assets and mortgaged land (fully detailed in Annexure A-4 and para No.5.7 of the application, respectively) as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶22

¶23

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 15.10.2026 . 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: 14.09.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh HARSH

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Amar Dass

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Amar Dass

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

Bank of India versus Nathubhai Jesangbhai Valagath

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Farooq Basirahmed Shaikh

Yes Bank versus Radhaben

Baldev Singh versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited

Neelam Rani versus Hdfc Bank

Gurtej Commission Agent versus Punjab and Sind Bank