Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh

DRT24 Aug 2026OA/1655/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed a bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of a sum exceeding Rs.30 lakhs comprising vehicle loan, term loan, and working capital facility from the borrower and guarantors, ordering the issue of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.30,23,691.56 plus interest and costs from respondents; recovery certificate issued to be sold through hypothecated vehicle and other properties.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1655/2024 Date of Institution: 04.03.2024 Date of Decision: 24.08.2026

¶4

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited, branch situated at Agro Hi-Tech Sopore, Jammu and Kashmir 193201.

¶5

...Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh (Borrower), S/o Ghulam Mohammad Sheikh R/o Humlina Amargarh Sopore, Jammu and Kashmir 193201.

¶8

Mr. Aadil Ahmad Sheikh (Guarantor) S/o Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh R/o Humlina Amargarh Sopore, Jammu and Kashmir 193201.

¶9

Mr. Mohammad Ashraf Shah (Guarantor) S/o Ghulam Qadir Shah R/o: Telwan Mohalla Seelo Sopore, Jammu and Kashmir 193201. now represented by his legal representatives and legal heirs:

¶10

i. Fata Begum (Wife) W/o Late Mohammad Ashraf Shah R/o Telwan Mohalla Seelo Sopore, Baramulla.

¶11

ii. Imtiyaz Ahmad Shah (Son) S/o Late Mohammad Ashraf Shah R/o Telwan Mohalla Seelo Sopore, Baramulla.

¶12

iii. Shahbaz Ahmad Shah (Son) S/o Late Mohammad Ashraf Sháh R/o Telwan Mohalla Seelo Sopore, Baramulla.

¶13

iv. Rehana (Daughter) D/o Late Mohammad Ashraf Shah R/o Telwan Mohalla Seelo Sopore, Baramulla. ...Defendants Advocates Sh. Gaurav Thakur, proxy Counsel for Sh. Mayank Mathur, Counsel for the Applicant Bank. Defendants – ex parte .

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.30,23,691.56p with interest from 04.03.2024.

¶15

¶16

ORDER

¶17

On 04.03.2024, Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.31,25,019.56p with interest against Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh and others (defendants). 2. Defendant No.1 is the borrower; Defendant Nos.2 and 3 stood as Guarantors. Bank’s case is that on 25.04.2018, it had granted a vehicle loan of Rs.25 lacs to defendant No.1 for vehicle purpose. The vehicle loan was chargeable to interest @10.70%. On 03.12.2020, bank had granted a composite term loan facility aggregating for Rs.9.50,000/- which includes a term loan facility of Rs.6,65,000/- and a working capital facility of Rs.2,85,000/-. The term loan facility of Rs.6,65,000/- was chargeable to interest @11.55% and the working capital facility of Rs.2,85,000/- was chargeable to interest @12.95%. To secure the loan facilities, defendant No.1 had hypothecated his vehicle (fully detailed in para No.5.10 of the application). Defendant Nos.2 and 3 stood as Guarantors for the above loan facilities (Vide Guarantee Deed dated 04.05.2018). The defendants had acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 01.05.2021. On 31.01.2024, a sum of Rs.30,23,691.56p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

3. On 13.11.2024,	summonses were sent to the defendants by
registered post, which w	ere duly served. However, defendants did not put in
appearance. Vide order	dated 08.04.2026, they were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove	its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit
of Mr. Ashish Bhasin,	Law Officer, along with the loan and security
documents.

¶19

¶20

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 a vehicle loan of Rs.25 lacs and a composite term loan facility aggregating for Rs.9.50,000/and on 31.01.2024, a sum of Rs.30,23,691.56p (vehicle loan: Rs.21,66,338.76p; term loan: Rs.5,27,709/- and working capital facility: Rs.3,29,643.80p) was due.

¶21

6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.30,23,691.56p (Rupees Thirty Lacs Twenty-Three Thousand Six
Hundred Ninety-One and Paise Fifty-Six Only) i.e., vehicle loan of
Rs.21,66,338.76p with interest @10.70% per annum with monthly rests;
term loan of Rs.5,27,709/- with interest @11.55% per annum with monthly
rests and working capital facility of Rs.3,29,643.80p with interest @12.95%
per annum with monthly rests from 04.03.2024, till the date of payment is
hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant Nos.1 and 2 would be
joint and several and the liability of the legal heirs of defendant No.3 would
be limited upto the extent of properties inherited by them from the estate of
the deceased defendant No.3 for the whole of the decretal amount. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated vehicle (fully detailed in para
No.5.10 of the application) as well as from the personal movable and
immovable property(ies) of the defendants.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
28.09.2026.
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:24.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh HARSH

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Sheikh

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 Pavithra E

Mohammad Azeem Shad and another versus Fullerton India housing finance company limited

Mohd Naseemuddin versus Icici Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus Karan Vohra

Uco Bank versus Shri Sher Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Gopal Enterprises