Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Suchita Choudhary

DRT20 Jan 2026OA/36/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Kotak Mahindra Bank under Section 19 RDB Act to recover outstanding dues from two borrowers. After ex-parte proceedings due to non-appearance by respondents, the Tribunal determined the debt of Rs. 84.83 lakh based on documentary evidence and passed an order to issue a Recovery Certificate against mortgaged vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Debt of Rs. 84,83,798/- with compound interest allowed; Recovery Certificate to be issued under Section 19(22); mortgaged assets attached and subject to realization.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Suchita Choudhary — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

OA 36 of2022jJ I

DRT, PATN A

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶6

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶7

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶8

OA Case No. 36 of 2022

¶9

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, registered office at 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai 400051

¶10

. . . . . . . Applicant

¶11

¶12

Suchita Choudhary, D/o Urmial Devi, 103, Urmila Rita Apartment, Rajvanshi Nagar, Road No.02, Village- Patna, Anchal- Patna Sadar, District- Patna, Bihar 800023

¶13

Radheshyam Chaudhary, M/o Dukhni Devi, Sadhopur Jiwan, Vaishali, Bihar 844114

¶14

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶15

Present:

¶16

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

¶17

Dated:20.01.2026

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

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 31.12.202 1 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.84,83,798/- as on 21.08.2021 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 22.08.2021 with costs till realization.

¶20

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.

¶21

Defendants approached the applicant oank for sanction of loan facilities and after due consideration, the applicant bank has sanctioned loan facilities aggregating to Rs.1,34,58,476/- on different dates 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 executed various loan

OA 36 of20221J1

DRT, PATNA

and security documents and also hypothecated the commercial vehicles in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA.

¶26

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 14.07.2021

¶27

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.

¶28

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.84,83,798/- as on 21.08.2021 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 22.08.2021 till the realization.

¶29

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 30.06.2023, 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 ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently, substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 23.07.2023 in “Dainik Bhaskar” and “Times of India” newspapers Patna and Gaya location.

¶30

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 20.09.2023 .

¶31

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also

¶32

V,{\ ,. .., pres!':bgsII ’ ’ 9ebW Bc\ FISh

OA 36 of2022jJ1

DRT, PATNA

given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Manish Kumar Singh, Authorized Representatives of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶37

SI.No	Description of Documents PhotocoDies	of 1Date Execution	Amount (in Lakh)	Signature of Executants	1 Ex./ Ann. No
	Loanapplications Loan cumguarantee lement.DP Note	16.10.2018	Rs.40,63,040/'	Defendants
2	Loanapplication Loan cumguarantee :ementDP Note a	04.08.2018	Rs.93 ,95,436/-	Defendants	2
n 3 10	of oM accounts

¶38

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶39

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.

¶40

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.

¶41

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.

¶42

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bark has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 14.07.2021, whereas the present application has been filed on 31.12.2021. Even, it is

¶43

\\ pi,, iding Oft“' Debts Recovery 'FIll)an al

OA 36 of 20221J I

DRT1 PATNA

counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant 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.

¶49

Shri Manish Kumar Singh, Authorized Representatives 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.

¶50

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.

¶51

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.

¶52

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.

¶53

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 evidence 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 lay admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶54

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

¶55

15 . 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

OA 36 of2022IJI

DRT, PATN A

documents, as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. 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.

¶60

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 21.08.2021 has been proved to be Rs.84,83,798/- only by way of statement of accounts and affidavit. 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.

¶61

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.84,83,798/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 31.12.2021 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶62

ORDER

¶63

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.84,83,798/- along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 31.12.202 1 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶64

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

¶65

Defendants are debarred &om 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

¶66

V.P~

¶67

PresIding omce1 Debts Re:IT;i 'rTL Dun&)

DRTq PATNA

OA 36 of 2022jJl

certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy 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.

¶72

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 mortgage(1/ 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. The copy of this judgment be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.

¶73

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DIff , Patna on 27.02.2026. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶74

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 20th day of January, 2026.

¶75

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶76

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Reppywy lkib+@#patna Debts Recovery Tribuna PATNA

¶77

FQRNI NQ. 9 [See Regulation 24(1 )]

¶78

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶79

2nd Fk)or! (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisu (GPOA)I

¶80

Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-8C)OC}25'

RC No, 14/2026 IN

Case No: OA/36/2022

In the Matter of: (CH_ 1) KOTAK MAHINDRABANK LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE AT 27 BKC, C 27, G BLOCK. BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA E

¶86

Applicant(s)

¶87

MUMBAI ,MAHARASHTRA 40005 1

¶88

–-–- Versus -––--

¶89

¶90

(CD- 1) SUCHITA CHOUDHARY D/o Urmila Devi 1031 Urmila Rita Apartment, Rajvanshi Nagn, Road No.02, Village- Patna, Anchal- Patna Sadar, Patna ,BIHAR -800023

¶91

Defendant(s)

¶92

(CD- 2) RADHESHYAM CHAUDHARY M/0 DUKHNI DEVI, SADHOPUR JrWAN,

¶93

VAISHALI, BIHAR 844 1 14

¶94

&my£lyMM@&LBL]4W2&9L[_RHR££LEigIByJaKElakhIEighbY-Eight Only]

¶95

In terms of final order dated 20/01/2026 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. 8483798.00 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 31/12/2021 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the OA/36/2022 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶96

UCHITI ltly As on
10 1/12/2021 F83798.00 1IAn
IOUDHARY
tonthly ) iSeverally
FHESFrYAM :om lintly on
IA LY EIO 1131/12/2021 [83798.00 183798.00
:Monthly )

¶97

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors

¶98

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 proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993.

¶99

Parties are directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR , Recovery Ofnc% DEBTS RECOVERY TRiBUNAL PATNA on 27/02/2026.

¶100

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amended from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors.

¶101

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 29/01/2026

¶102

tt/ Re;-lstr ar pelts Recovery Tribunal \ PatDa

¶103

OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA hes itIIrq Omen Debts Recovery Tri:bun& PATNA

¶104

FORM NO. 10

¶105

¶106

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶107

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶108

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

¶109

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 14/2026

Case No: OA/36/2022

Applicant(s): KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Versus

¶114

Defendant(s): SUCHITA CHOUDHARY

¶115

Sr. No.	[tem of Costs	IAmountinRs
	'eeon theapplication	m8
	r
3	c
4	o
	/liscellaneousCharges
	-otalCosts:Rs

Place: PATNA

PRESIDhdoFFICER

Date: 29/01/2026

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶120

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

¶121

Presiding Omcer DBbb Recoveq Tribwin PATN A

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Suchita Choudhary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Suchita Choudhary

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

Indian Bank versus Shri Deot Sidh Balaji Coals Private Limited and Others

Indian Bank versus Messers Jaggi Cement Store Building Material and Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Desert Rose Designs

Uco Bank versus Mahender Singh (deceased)

Canara Bank versus Fatehbir Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri Gautam Kumar