Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Smt Archna Kumari

DRT20 May 2026OA/2029/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of approximately Rs. 55.92 Lakhs along with interest against two borrowers who mortgaged property as security but failed to repay. The loan advanced was proved via affidavit and documents, and a recovery sale order was directed.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.55,91,747.15 with interest @12.85% p.a. from 11.08.2022. Issuance of Recovery Certificate. Sale of mortgaged property and recovery from personal assets. Injunction removed pending sale.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Smt Archna Kumari — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2029/2022 Date of Institution: 11.08.2022 Date of Decision: 20.05.2026

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra having its branches all over India and a branch at Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Smt. Archana Kumari w/o Mr. Aman Kumar, r/o H.No.B-3,173, Nai Abadi, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶8

Aman Kumar Sharma s/o Sh. Ram Parvesh Sharma, r/o H.No.B3,173, Nai Abadi, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Deepal Tamang proxy counsel for Sh. R. S. Badhran through VC, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 02.05.2024 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.55,91,747.15p with interest @12.85% per annum with monthly rests from 11.08.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Bank of Maharashtra has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.55,91,747.15p with interest against Smt. Archana Kumari and another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 20.06.2019, it had granted a loan of Rs.22.00 Lacs to the defendants in the form of Housing Loan. Again on 13.09.2019, bank granted another loan of Rs.25.00 Lacs to the defendants in the form of C.C.-L.A.P. On 20.07.2021, Bank granted a loan of Rs.1.51Lacs in the form of F.I.T.L. arising out of C.C. Limit to the Defendants. To secure both the loans, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged her property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan

¶17

¶18

was chargeable to interest @12.85% per annum with monthly rests. On 27.05.2022, a sum of Rs.55,91,747.15p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 02.11.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 02.05.2024, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Yangchan Dolma, Chief Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-20. 5. 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 the loan of Rs.47.00 Lacs and on 27.05.2022, a sum of Rs.55,91,747.15p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.55,91,747.15p (Rupees Fifty Five Lacs Ninety One Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Seven and Paise Fifteen Only) with interest @12.85% per annum with monthly rests from 11.08.2022, 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 mortgaged property fully detailed in para No.3A 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 24.06.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶20

¶21

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: 20.05.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Bank of Maharashtra v. Smt Archna Kumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Smt Archna Kumari

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

M/S Mahavir Food Products versus Uco Bank

Gautam Kotwal versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

M S Home First Finance Company India Ltd. versus Dmi Housing Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus Gagandeep Singh

Akash Musaddi Proprietor of Mittal Trading Co. versus Icici Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kaloo Ram @ Om Parkash