Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Uttam Kumar

DRT19 Jun 2026OA/276/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited's application for recovery of dues. The bank established the validity of its claim through documentary evidence and an affidavit, noting the defendants' default and failure to appear, thereby determining the exact debt amount recoverable.

What did the court decide?

Order directing defendants to pay Rs. 31,62,470.80 plus interest and costs and issuing a Recovery Certificate.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Uttam Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

DRT, PATNA

OA 276 of 20241 Jl

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶5

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶6

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶7

OA Case No. 276 of 2024

¶8

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, ground floor, Hotel Pritam Inn Main Road, Pethia Bazar Mahavir Cancer Hospital Road, Phulwarisharif Road, Patna 801505

¶9

. . . . . . .Applicant

¶10

¶11

Uttam Kumar, S/o Ramashis Sharma. Post- Koshidhara, PSParasbigha, Village- Korma, Jehanabad, Bihar 804417

¶12

Lalsa Devi, W/o Ramashis Sharma, Post- Koshidhara, Village- Korma, Jehanabad, Bihar 8044 17

¶13

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶14

Present:

¶15

For the Applicant Shri Anil Kumar. Advocate For the Defendants None

¶16

Dated : 19.06.2026

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 10.04.2024 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.31,76,464.13 as on 02.02.2024 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 03.02.2024 with costs till realization.

¶19

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant.

¶20

Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship firm of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanction of commercial vehicle loan of Rs.41,85,381/-, vide loan application dated 21.04.2022, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 04.06.2022 on various terms and conditions. as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have

OA 276 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATN A

executed various loan and security documents and also hypothecated the vehicles in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA

¶25

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities, the defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of .its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 13.01.2024

¶26

Since, the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶27

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.31,76,464.13 as on 02.02.2024 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 03.02.2024 till the realization.

¶28

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 26.06.2024, requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993. But the defendants have not appeared, hence, the Registry of this Tribunal has again issued notice on 05.08.2024, which was served by way of affixing the summons on the outer door of the defendants’ premises. The same has been affirmed on affidavit of Sri Manish Kumar Singh, Authorized Representative of the bank, filed on 06.05.2025 .

¶29

Despite the service of registered summons/notices and by way of affixation of notice on the outer door of the defendants’ premises, the defendants failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 06.02.2026.

¶30

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Manish Kumar Singh,

OA 276 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATN A

Authorized Representative of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶35

of Description Documents	of Date Execution	Amount (in Lakh)	Signature of Executants
PhotocoDies
Loanapplication	21 .04.2022		Defendants
Loan cumguarantee ment	02.06.2022	Rs.41 ,85,381/-	Defendants
Dm	02.06.2022	Rs.41 ,85,381/.	Defendants	3
Power ofAttorney	11.05.2022		Def.no.1	4
Undertakin.	04.06.2022
Legal notice	27.12.2023
Statementofaccount

¶36

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶37

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶38

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶39

It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is functioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶40

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 13.01.2024, whereas the present application has been filed on 10.04.2024. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant

q,,

OA 276 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATNA

bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶46

Shri Manish Kumar Singh, Authorized Representative of the applicant bank has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶47

Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (1) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶48

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant, the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶49

¶50

The rule 12 (11) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker’s Books evidence that Act, 1891 (18 of 1891) shall apply to a certified copy of an entry in a Banker’s Books furnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶51

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certifIed copy of any entry in a banker’s book shaH in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidetlce of the matters. transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶52

As such the certified true copies of the documents are. admissible in evidence. The statement of account maintained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

¶53

On perusal of the application, documents, affidavit and on consideration of the arguments, it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, as stated in the application and proved by afore$aid evidence.

OA 276 of 2024jJl

DRT, PATNA

Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account .

¶59

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O. A., was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 31.01.2024 has been proved to be Rs.3 1,62,470.80 only by way of statement of accounts. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶60

In my view, facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly, the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.31,62,470.80 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 9.9% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 10.04.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶61

ORDER

¶62

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.3 1,62,470.80 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 9.9% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 10.04.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶63

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶64

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy

a\k

DRT, PATNA

OA 276 of 2024jJ1

Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery Certificate before the Registrar/Sub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets.

¶70

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate 'in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants. The Recovery OffIcer will issue demand notice to the CertifIcate debtors only after the proof of compliance under rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules 1993, is submitted by the applicant. If The Applicant /CertifIcate holder fails to comply with directions of the Recovery Of$cer, the execution may be dismissed for non-prosecution. The copy of this judgment be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.

¶71

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 03.08.2026. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶72

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 19th day of June, 2026.

¶73

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶74

[KausMndraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶75

FORM NO. 9 [See Regulation 24( 1 )]

¶76

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶77

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchad Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶78

RE(.'QVERY (.’ERTIFICATE UNDER SECTIQN 19(a READ WITH SEe'TION 19(a2 OF THE RE(,'QVERY QF DEBT$ & BANIWUPTCYACT1 19931 AS AMENDED FRQM TIME TQ TIPIE•

¶79

RC Not 158/2t126 IN

¶80

Case No: OA/276/2024

¶81

In the Matter of (CH- 1) KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED GROUND FLOOR HOTEL PRITAM INN MAIN ROAD, PETHIA BAZAR MAHAVIR CANCER HOSPITAL ROAD, PHULWARISHARIF ROAD, PATNA ,BIHAR -0

¶82

Applicant(s)

¶83

¶84

(CD- 1) UTIAM KUMAR . S/o RAMASHIS SHARMA Post - Koshidhara, P.S.- Parasbigha, VillageKorma.

¶85

Jehanabad ,BIHAR -804417

¶86

Defendant(s)

¶87

(CD- 2) LALSA DEVI W/0- RAMASHIS SHARMA POSTKOSHIDHARA, VILL- KORMA, JEHANABAD ,BIHAR -804417

¶88

¶89

Pai se EigU)dmyJ

¶90

In terms of final order dated 19/06/2026 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 3162470.80 along with cosE expenses and interest from the 10/04/2024 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the OA/276/2024 and future interest Born order date till the date of realisation in hrll, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors9 hereinafter referred to as:-

¶91

	Int. Int. Type Type/Mode!Rate	'Effective : Date	lunt(RS.)	Liability Type	Interest (as a Order Date)	RC Amount(Rs.)	Remark
	pound Interest (Monthly) b.9	.10/04/202419/06/2026	162470.80	ltly :Severally		162470.80
LALSA DEVI	pound Monthly) 1.9	:10/04/202419/06/2026	162470.80	Fointly ,g:eraHy	InterestAs Order Date	162470.80

¶92

_ in case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days9 same shall be recovered hom the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.

¶93

The mongaged or hYpothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shan be U;:T9H)A::::rHbTbetsr=:=E]:llfiT;F,e#tt9§;”uance of the Recov-V c"HEincab issued "nd“ oaJH/2:;6rirected to appear before M[ANOJ Bi'UMAR ’ RecoveW Omcer’ DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on

¶94

1][1r1 d = ; e: :i=F:: 1(bhH1):1F? ; r ;} I ?I e r:::=v ::; =F T:£ t : sly:: ttLisi ::in;=F ;TITc i:iT;fiG : = T:t pPiBIb(= amended from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors –-- - –” '’ ’- \

¶95

Thls Certificate has been issued under mY siWature and seal of the Tribunal on this 20/06/2026

¶96

¶97

PRESIDIK OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶98

RegIstrar olutmy mpaha qnHIff 31MIRH, qm

¶99

FORM NO. 10 [See Regulation 24(2)]

¶100

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶101

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶102

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE

MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 158/2026

Case No: OA/276/2024

Applicant(s): KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Versus

¶108

Defendant(s): UTTAM KUMAR

¶109

temofCosts	E Amount inRs
Feeonthi’;bIAnii	E34666
'rocess Fees(Inc. PublicatIon)	?0
AdvocateFees	[0
Commissioner/Receiver/Valuatiome{tag-FU	,0
,cellaneous Charges	[a
TotalCo£i£:-ki-	iilddb

¶110

Place: PATNA

¶111

Date: 20/06/2026

¶112

PRESIDI#OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶113

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Uttam Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Uttam Kumar

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

Ms D S Enterprise And Anr. versus Axis Bank

State Bank of India versus Sri Amal Roy And Anr.

Ved Parkash versus Cholamandalam investment and finance company limited

Indian Bank versus M/S Sai Automobiles

Bank of India versus M/s Vishnu Priya Enterprises

Badal Das and Anr. versus Aditya Birla Finance Limited and Anr.