Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harcharan Singh Dhaliwal @ Harcharan Singh and Others

DRT10 Aug 2026OA/1626/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd against borrowers and a guarantor for recovery of an NPA loan of Rs.1,23,71,298.89, with revised interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.1,23,71,298.89 plus simple interest at 8% p.a., with costs, from sale of mortgaged property or attachment of personal assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Harcharan Singh… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1626/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 10.08.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, a banking company incorporated under Companies Act 1956 and licensed under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its Registered Office at 27BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 and the successor to ING Vysya Bank Limited under the Amalgamation Scheme dated 01/04/2015, sanctioned by the Reserve Bank of India in exercise of the powers contained in Sub Section (4) of Section 44A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its branches all over India including its Branch at S.C.O. 153-154-155, Sector 9/C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, through its Authorized Representative, Sh. Munish Sharma.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Harcharan Singh Dhaliwal @ Harcharan Singh S/o Sh. Dalip Singh, House No. 107, Village Barkandi/63, Sanghudhon B.O., Tehsil & District Muktsar, Punjab-152026

¶10

Smt. Chhinder Pal Kaur @ Shinder Pal Kaur W/o Sh. Harcharan Singh, House No. 21, Village Barkandi Part-1, Sanghudhon B.O., Muktsar, District Muktsar, Punjab-152026

¶11

Sh. Gurcharan Singh S/o Sh. Dalip Singh, H.No. 107, Village Barkandi, Sanghudhon B.O., Muktsar, District Muktsar, Punjab152026

¶12

…….Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Satwinder Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Devinder Singh,

¶15

Advocate for Applicant (through VC)

¶16

None for Defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 06.08.2026)

¶17

2 OA/1626/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SH. HARCHARAN SINGH DHALIWAL @ HARCHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

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.1,23,71,298.89 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Three Lac Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Eighty Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Authorized Representative, of the Applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 27.06.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the Defendant nos. 1 & 2, approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.90.00 lacs. Defendant no.3 stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.90.00 lacs vide Loan Agreement and ancillary documents dated 15.05.2014 and 17.05.2014, which are Annexure A3 (Colly.) to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 mortgaged his property that’s agricultural land measuring 224Kanal-2Marla with details given as under:

¶20

i. Land measuring 79Kanal-16Marla, situated at Village Barkandi, Hadbast No. 63, Tehsil & District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab.

¶21

ii. Land measuring 113Kanal-6Marla, situated at Village Rupana, Hadbast No. 61, Tehsil & District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab.

¶22

iii. Land measuring 31Kanal-0Marla, situated at Village Sangu Dhaun, Hadbast No. 64, Tehsil & District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab.

¶23

vide Mortgage Deed bearing Vasika No.1260 dated 11.06.2014, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Documents executed: Amalgamation of ING Vysya Bank with Kotak Mahindra Bank dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice and Postal Receipts dated 29.06.2022 and 04.07.2022, which are Annexure A5 to this OA; Statement of Account

¶24

3 OA/1626/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SH. HARCHARAN SINGH DHALIWAL @ HARCHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶25

(KCC) duly certified under the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶26

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, there was a debit of Rs.1,23,71,298.89 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Three Lac Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Eighty Nine Only), 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 summons to appear before this Tribunal. Thereafter, OA was dismissed for default of the applicant vide order dated 23.07.2025 and later, restored on its Original Number vide order dated 21.08.2025, passed in MA No. 117/2025. Notices were issued regarding restoration of the OA to defendants. No one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 06.08.2026.

¶28

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Authorized Representative, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, has been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record.

¶29

It was argued by learned proxy counsel, through video conferencing, that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶30

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A6 to this OA, it is

¶31

proved that the defendant nos. 1 & 2, approached the applicant for availing of the loan facility, which was granted to them. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. Defendants 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

¶32

4 OA/1626/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SH. HARCHARAN SINGH DHALIWAL @ HARCHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶33

is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,23,71,298.89 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Three Lac Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Eighty 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 amount.

¶34

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00% p.a. plus 2.00% p.a. penal interest 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, 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 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.1,23,71,298.89 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Three Lac Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight and Paise Eighty 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 mortgaged property of the defendant no.1 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

¶37

5 OA/1626/2022 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SH. HARCHARAN SINGH DHALIWAL @ HARCHARAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶38

same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The

¶39

applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶40

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶41

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶42

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 25.08.2026

¶43

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 .

¶44

Dated: 10.08.2026.

¶45

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶46

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harcharan Singh Dhaliwal @ Harcharan Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harcharan Singh Dhaliwal @ Harcharan Singh 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 Limited versus Sh. Kabal Singh and Others

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

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

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Gurbinder Singh

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Guru Nanak Industry and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Mohd Sahil and Another