Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Harbans Kaur and Others

DRT9 Jan 2026OA/1601/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an application for recovery of Rs. 48.2 lakhs against borrowers and guarantors. The court examined documentary evidence regarding an NPAs loan account, mortgage, and associated agreements, finding the case proved. The tribunal granted uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and authorized recovery through sale of pledged assets or attachment of personal property under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 48,20,749.00 jointly and severally with interest @8% p.a. declared; Recovery Certificate issued; enforcement allowed via SARFAESI Act or attachment of personal assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Smt. Harbans Kaur and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1601/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 08.08.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 02.01.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., (in which ING Vysya Bank Ltd. stands amalgamated and the name of IVBL has been changed to Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. (KMBL) pursuant to the order issued by the Reserve Bank of India under sub section 4 of section 44A of the banking Regulations Act, 1949 sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation effective from 31.03.2015 as communicated by RBI vide its letter no.DBR.No.PSBD.14527/16.01.136/2014/2015 March 312015 and order issued by RBI vide letter no. DBR/ PSBD/ 14476/ 16.01.136/2014-2015 dated 31^st March 2015) thus the applicant is the banking company carrying on the banking business under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at 27BKC, C27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai and branches at Different places one in Bhadson, District Patiala, Punjab through Sh. Munish Sharma, Authorized Officer of the applicant.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

1. Smt. Harbans Kaur W/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, R/o House No.77, Village Ghanurhki, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶9

Sh. Jagtar Singh, Son of Sh. Ranjit Singh, R/o House No.77, Village Ghanurhki, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Sarabjit Singh, Son of Sh. Sardara Singh, R/o Village Wazidri, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶11

………. Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. J S Sehgal, Advocate for the applicant

¶14

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 19.07.2024

¶15

¶16

OA NO.1601/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS KAUR AND OTHERS

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

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.48,20,749.00 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Authorized Officer of applicant who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Delegation of Powers vide resolution dated 27.06.2022, which is Annexures A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 & 2 approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.42.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 24.07.2014. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.40.00 Lacs vide Credit arrangement dated 31.07.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant nos.1 & 2 had mortgaged their immovable property i.e. land measuring 48K-00M i.e. 6 Acres (28K-00M in the name of defendant no. 1 and 20K-00M in the name of defendant no. 2) situated at Village Ghanurhki, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no.1622 dated 06.08.2014, which are Annexure A12 & A13 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed : Order of amalgamation issued by Reserve Bank of India dated 31.03.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Annexure B-1, Demand Promissory Note, Take delivery letter to DPN, Hypothecation agreement, Guarantee bond, Consent letter to be executed by borrower & Guarantor, Undertaking cum letter of Authorization for insuring crop and other moveable assets, all dated 31.07.2014, which are Annexures A4 to A11 to this OA; Notice dated 22.07.2022 along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A14 to

¶23

¶24

OA NO.1601/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS KAUR AND OTHERS

¶25

A17 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A18 to this ОА.

¶26

The loan account became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.48,20,749.00, 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.

¶27

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal. Sh. Vineet Garg, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendant no. 2 on 22.08.2023 and filed his Power of Attorney on behalf of defendant no. 2. Since, no one appeared on behalf of defendant nos. 1 and 3, they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19.07.2024. Since WS filed by defendant no. 2 was beyond stipulated period, his defense was struck off vide order dated 19.07.2024. Also, as no one appeared on behalf of defendant no. 2, he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 19.07.2024.

¶28

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, has been filed.

¶29

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶30

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant 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 A18 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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 loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.48,20,749.00 (Rupees

¶31

¶32

OA NO.1601/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS KAUR AND OTHERS

¶33

Forty Eight Lacs Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Nine Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶34

In so far as pendent lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00% with half yearly rests from 24.06.2022 till the realization.

¶35

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/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan 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 appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶36

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.48,20,749.00 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Nine Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account 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/mortgaged properties of the defendants 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.

¶37

¶38

OA NO.1601/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS KAUR AND OTHERS

¶39

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 23.01.2026. 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: 09.01.2026. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Harbans Kaur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Harbans Kaur 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

Indusind Bank Limited versus Sh. Mahipal Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Messrs Khushal Agro Chemicals and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Harjinder Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sarabjeet Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Modish Fashion Wears and Another

State Bank of India versus Messrs Kohinoor Sales and Another