Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Narbita and Another

DRT15 Jun 2026OA/342/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed an original application under Section 19 of the RDB Act filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. against two defendants for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 1.13 crores. The tribunal reduced the claimed interest rate from 24% to 8% per annum before directing sale of hypothecated assets and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 1,13,89,728.14 along with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing, jointly and severally, recoverable from sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Smt. Narbita… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 342/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 05.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 15.06.2026

¶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 at SCO no. 131-132-133, 2^nd Floor, Apra Tower, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141001 through its Manager, Sh. Rakesh Kumar

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Narbita, W/o Sh. Jagpal Singh, R/o House no. 239, Gali no. 4, Shakti Nagar, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, Haryana124507

¶10

Sh. Jagpal Singh, S/o Sh. Ramphal, R/o House no. 239, Gali no. 4, Shakti Nagar, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, Haryana124507

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Manav Singal, Advocate for applicant

¶14

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 11.06.2026)

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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. 1,13,89,728.14 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight and Paise Fourteen Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rakesh Kumar , M anager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Resolution dated 29.11.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

¶18

OA/342/2026

¶19

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARBITA AND ANOTHER

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that defendants approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs. 13.10 Lacs for purchase of one unit of commercial vehicle vide Individual Customer Relation Form dated 15.04.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, defendants approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs.84.00 Lacs for purchase of two units of commercial vehicles along with their bodies vide Individual Customer Relation Form dated 04.09.2023, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. Thereafter, defendants again approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs. 88.00 Lacs for purchase of two units of commercial vehicles along with their bodies vide Individual Customer Relation Form, which is Annexure A15 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 13,57,812.00 for purchase of one unit of commercial vehicle vide Loan-cum-Guarantee Agreement dated 31.05.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 72.00 Lacs for purchase of two units of commercial vehicles along with their bodies vide Loan-cum-Guarantee Agreement dated 05.09.2023, which is Annexure A10 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant again sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 88.00 Lacs for purchase of two units of commercial vehicles along with their bodies vide Loan-cum-Guarantee Agreement dated 03.02.2024, which is Annexure A16 to this OA.

¶22

Defendants hypothecated their movable assets namely: i. Ashok Leyland FV 4923 bearing Registration no. HR63C0022, Engine no. EXPZ109725 and Chassis no. MB1UPKJBXEPXK4780 vide Virtual RC, which is Annexure A6 to this OA;

¶23

ii. Bharat Benz 5532TT 4X2- 14 bearing Registration no. NL01AH1428, Engine no. 926956D0151823 and Chassis no. MEC862HCGPP145334 vide Tax Invoice dated 31.08.2023 and Virtual RC, which is Annexure A8 to this OA;

¶24

iii. Bharat Benz 5532TT 4X2- 14 bearing Registration no. NL01AH1429, Engine no. 926956D0151813 and Chassis no.

¶25

3 OA/342/2026

¶26

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARBITA AND ANOTHER

¶27

MEC862HCGPP145330 vide Tax Invoice dated 31.08.2023 and Virtual RC, which is Annexure A9 to this OA;

¶28

iv. Bharat Benz 5528TT 4X2- 11 bearing Registration no. NL01AH6654, Engine no. 926956D0158896 and Chassis no. MEC862FCLPP152210 vide Tax Invoice dated 12.02.2024 and Virtual RC, which is Annexure A13 to this OA;

¶29

v. Bharat Benz 5528TT 4X2- 11 bearing Registration no. NL01AH6653, Engine no. 926956D0157982 and Chassis no. MEC862FCKPP150816 vide Tax Invoice dated 12.02.2024 and Virtual RC, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶30

Documents Executed: DP Note and Power of Attorney, both dated 31.05.2023, which are Annexure A4 and A5 to this OA; DP Note and Power of Attorney, both dated 05.09.2023, which are Annexure A11 and A12 to this OA; DP Note and Power of Attorney, both dated 03.02.2024, which are Annexure A17 and A18 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated 16.01.2026, which is Annexure A19 to this OA and Statement of Accounts, which are Annexure A20 to A28 to this OA.

¶31

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 1,13,89,728.14 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.

¶32

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 11.06.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶33

4 OA/342/2026

¶34

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARBITA AND ANOTHER

¶35

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

¶36

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A28 to this OA, it is proved that 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 applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, 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. 1,13,89,728.14 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lacs Eighty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight and Paise Fourteen Only) from defendants, along with interest, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶37

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 13.01.2026 till the realization.

¶38

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 assets, 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 @8.00% 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.

¶39

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.1,13,89,728.14 (Rupees One Crore Thirteen Lacs Eighty Nine

¶40

¶41

OA/342/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARBITA AND ANOTHER

¶42

Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Eight and Paise Fourteen Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in all the 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 assets 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.

¶43

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶44

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 30.06.2026. 15. 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 . Dated: 15.06.2026

¶45

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Narbita and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Smt. Narbita 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

State Bank of India versus M/S S M Enterprises and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Harnek Singh and Ors.

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jagir Singh And others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Varinder Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Jaj Singh Alias Judge Singh through His Legal Heirs

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Laxman Prasad Mandal