Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Saddam Husain and Another

DRT30 Apr 2026OA/1723/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. against two respondents for recovery of outstanding loans totaling Rs. 85,32,335.95. The court ordered recovery via hypothecated vehicles and awarded simple interest at 08% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued. Respondents declared liable to pay Rs. 85,32,335.95 along with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. Recovery to proceed through sale of hypothecated vehicles.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1723/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 10.12.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 30.04.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., a Body Corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 and having Branches all over India and one of its Branch Offices situated SCO no. 131-132-133, 2^nd Floor, Apra Tower, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141001 through its Manager, Sh. Rakesh Kumar

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Saddam Husain, S/o Sh. Samay Dar, R/o House no. 81, Village and Post Office Jaidhari, Tehsil Chachhrauli, District Yamunanagar, Haryana- 135101

¶9

Smt. Shehnaj Bano, W/o Sh. Saddam Husain, R/o House no. 81, Village and Post Office Jaidhari, Tehsil Chachhrauli, District Yamunanagar, Haryana- 135101

¶10

…. Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Rahul Garg, Advocate for applicant

¶13

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 30.03.2026)

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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. 85,32,335.95 (Rupees Eighty Five Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Five and Paise Ninety Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Resolution dated 29.11.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

2 OA NO. 1723/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SADDAM HUSAIN AND ANOTHER

¶17

2. The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant of Commercial Vehicle Loan of Rs. 23.00 Lacs
vide Individual Customer Relation Form dated 12.07.2022, which is
Annexure A2to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached the
applicant for grant of Commercial Vehicle Loan of Rs. 20.70 Lacs vide
Individual Customer Relation Form dated 06.12.2022, which is
Annexure A7to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached the
applicant for grant of Vehicles Loan of Rs. 1.00 Crore vide Individual
Customer Relation Form dated 24.02.2024, which isAnnexure A12to this OA.
3. The applicant sanctioned the Commercial Vehicle Loan of
Rs.22,23,919.00 vide Loan cum Guarantee Agreement dated
29.08.2022, which isAnnexure A3to this OA and the terms and
conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the
applicant sanctioned the Commercial Vehicle Loan of Rs. 18,05,100.00
vide Loan cum Guarantee Agreement dated 23.01.2023, which is
Annexure A8to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the
Vehicles Loan of Rs. 97,06,800.00 vide Loan cum Guarantee
Agreement dated 20.03.2024, which isAnnexure A15to this OA.
Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.
4. Defendant no. 1 hypothecated his movable assets namely: i. Tata LPK 3118 bearing Registration no. HR58B8184, Engine no.
IS.B59B4S180K191F63797891 and Chassis no.
MAT466611k3f17439 vide Virtual RC, which isAnnexure A6to this OA;
ii. Tata Signa 4923 bearing Registration no. HR58B0617, Engine
no. ISBE592304081A63662995 and Chassis no.
MAT704122J3B03158 vide Virtual RC, which isAnnexure A11 to this OA;
iii. Bharat Benz 5528 bearing Registration no. HR58D1199, Engine no. 926956D0165292 and Chassis no. MEC862FCARP157495

¶18

3 OA NO. 1723/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SADDAM HUSAIN AND ANOTHER

¶19

vide Tax Invoice dated 07.03.2024, which is Annexure A13 to this OA and Virtual RC filed on 28.04.2026 through Diary no. 7546;

¶20

iv. Bharat Benz 5528 bearing Registration no. HR58D7140, Engine no. 926956D0165294 and Chassis no. MEC862FCARP157500 vide Tax Invoice dated 07.03.2024, which is Annexure A14 to this OA and Virtual RC filed on 28.04.2026 through Diary no. 7546.

¶21

Documents executed: DP Note and Power of Attorney, both dated 29.08.2022, which are Annexure A4 and A5 to this OA; DP Note and Power of Attorney, both dated 23.01.2023, which are Annexure A9 and A10 to this OA; DP Note and Power of Attorney, both dated 20.03.2024, which are Annexure A16 and A17 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated 30.10.2025, which is Annexure A18 to this OA and Statements of Accounts, which are Annexure A19 to A22 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 85,32,335.95, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶22

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of the defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 30.03.2026.

¶23

7.	In support of the OA, affidavit ofSh. Rakesh Kumar, Manager,
Kota	k Mahindra Bank Limited,has been filed.
8.	Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.
9.	It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the
docu	mentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted,
the	applicant had proved its case.

¶24

4 OA NO. 1723/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SADDAM HUSAIN AND ANOTHER

¶25

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A22 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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 loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, the accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 85,32,335.95 (Rupees Eighty Five Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Five and Paise Ninety Five Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶26

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24%p.a. with monthly rests from 18.10.2025 till the realization.

¶27

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 hypothecated vehicles, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.85,32,335.95 (Rupees Eighty Five Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Five and Paise Ninety Five Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00% p.a. in all the

¶29

5 OA NO. 1723/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SADDAM HUSAIN AND ANOTHER

¶30

loan accounts 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 vehicles 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.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.05.2026.

¶34

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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 30.04.2026

¶37

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶38

Presiding Officer,

¶39

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Saddam Husain and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Saddam Husain and Another

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

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Ranjeet Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. chamkaur singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Nawab Resturant and Another

Savita Prabhakar versus Punjab National Bank and Others

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Brij Pal and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Parveen Kumar and Others