Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Sat Kartar Transport Company and Others

DRT6 May 2026OA/353/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows the recovery of Rs.48,61,689.83 by the bank from the transport company and guarantors for non-repayment of vehicle loans. The court reduced the claimed 24% interest to 8% p.a. considering market trends. A recovery certificate is directed.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of principal amount with simple interest at 8% p.a. and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Sat Kartar Transport… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 353/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 05.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.05.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, a Body Corporate, incorporated under Companies Act 1956, having its Registered Office at 27 BKC, C-27, G- Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 and having its branches all over India and one of its branch offices, situated at S.C.O. No. 131-132-133, 2^nd Floor, Apra Tower, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana-141001, through its Manager, Sh. Rakesh Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Sat Kartar Transport Company, Through its Proprietor, Village Chanon, Post Office Nandpur Khesho, District Patiala, Punjab-147001.

¶10

Sh. Satvir Singh S/o Sh. Karamjit Singh, Proprietor M/s Sat Kartar Transport Company, R/o Village Chanon, Post Office Nandpur Khesho, District Patiala, Punjab-147001.

¶11

Ms. Amanpreet Kaur D/o Sh. Satvir Singh R/o Village Chanon, Post Office Nandpur Khesho, District Patiala, Punjab-147001.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Rahul Garg, Advocate for applicant

¶15

None for Defendants (already ex parte vide order dated 29.04.2026)

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.48,61,689.83 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Sixty One Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Eighty Three Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rakesh

¶18

2 OA/ 353/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Vs M/S SAT KARTAR TRANSPORT COMPANY AND OTHERS

¶19

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;

¶20

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility of Rs. 80.00 Lacs for purchase of Two commercial vehicles, vide Non-Individual Customer Relation Form dated 19.12.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no.3 stood as Guarantor.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned two Vehicle Loans of Rs. 39,60,847/- each vide Loan Cum Guarantee Agreement with schedules, dated

¶22

31.12.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶23

Defendants hypothecated their commercial vehicles as under:

¶24

(i) EICHER PRO 6028 bearing Registration No. PB-11DH-6378, Engine No. VEDX8643521K6P, Chassis No. MC2BAGRC0PK104635 vide Tax Invoice & Virtual Registration Certificate, which is Annexure A3 to this OA;

¶25

(ii) EICHER PRO 6028 bearing Registration No. PB-11DH-6379, Engine No. VEDX8643522K6P, Chassis No. MC2BAGRC0PK104636 vide Tax Invoice & Virtual Registration Certificate, which is Annexure A4 to this OA.

¶26

Documents Executed:Demand Promissory Note, Power of Attorney,
both dated 31.12.2023, which areAnnexures A6 & A7to this OA; Loan
Recall Notice dated 27.01.2026, which isAnnexure A8to this OA;
Statement of Accounts with certificate, which areAnnexures A9 & A10
to this OA.
5. 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.48,61,689.83 which is recoverable and the defendants
were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding
amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and
to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶27

3 OA/ 353/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Vs M/S SAT KARTAR TRANSPORT COMPANY AND OTHERS

¶28

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 29.04.2026 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Rakesh Kumar, Manager , Kotak Mahindra Bank, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. 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. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A10 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 applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, both 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.48,61,689.83 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Sixty One Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Eighty Three 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24.00% with monthly rests from 24.01.2026 till the realization.

¶29

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 both the loan

¶30

4 OA/ 353/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Vs M/S SAT KARTAR TRANSPORT COMPANY AND OTHERS

¶31

accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum Rs.48,61,689.83 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Sixty One Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Eighty Three Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in both 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.

¶33

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 28.05.2026 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: 06.05.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶34

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Sat Kartar Transport Company and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Sat Kartar Transport Company and Others

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

Axis Bank Limited versus Sh. Harpreet Singh Mankoo

State Bank of India versus Sh. Maninder Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Deeksha Roadlines and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Chhinder Singh Alias Sinder Singh

State Bank of India versus Smt. Harmanraj Kaur

Axis Bank Limited. versus Smt. Surjit Kaur and Others