Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Smt. Diksha Sharma and Another

DRT6 Feb 2026OA/375/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed a recovery application filed by Bank of Baroda against two borrowers who defaulted on a Rs. 20 lakh home loan. The court granted a recovery certificate for the principal amount plus interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 12.95% p.a., considering market conditions.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for principal with simple interest @8.00% p.a. from filing date till realization, enforceable via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Bank of Baroda versus Smt. Diksha Sharma and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.375/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.02.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.02.2026

¶6

Bank of Baroda (erstwhile Vijaya Bank), a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970, having its Head Office at Mandvi, Baroda and having one of its Branches at Sunder Nagar, Ludhiana through its Constituted Attorney Sh. Narindra Mehra, Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Sunder Nagar Branch, Ludhiana and who is also the Constituted Attorney and Principal Officer of the plaintiff/applicant.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Diksha Sharma wife of Sh. Navdeep Kumar Sharma, R/o House No. 1019/7A, Street No. 11, Near Bhagi Stand, Satguru Nagar, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶10

Smt. Veena wife of Sh.Satish Kumar, , R/o House No. 1019/7A, Street No. 11, Near Bhagi Stand, Satguru Nagar, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶11

…….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Ashok Kumar Verma, Advocate for the applicant Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 14.01.2026

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.26,70,108.88 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Seventy Thousand One Hundred Eight and Paise Eighty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Naresh Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 18.08.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶16

2 OA/375/2024 BANK OF BARODA VS. DIKSHA SHARMA AND ANOTHER

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants approached the applicant for the grant of Home Loan of Rs.20.00 Lacs.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned Home Loan of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction dated 25.07.2018, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶19

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged her immovable property bearing House No. 1910/7/A measuring 75 Sq. Yards situated at Village Daba, now known as Satguru Nagar, Street No.11, Near Bhagi Stand, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana, Punjab through equitable mortgage of sale deed bearing no. 2018-19/103/1/122 dated 26.07.2018, which is Annexure A7 to this OA Affidavit cum Declaration dated 25.07.2018, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed: Gazette Notification dated 02.01.2019 of Bank Merger, which is Annexure A1 vide to this OA; DP Note, Letter of Repayment, Articles of Agreement, all 25.07.2018, which are Annexures A4 to A6 to this OA; Letter of acknowledgment of liability dated 30.04.2020 and 21.02.2022, which are Annexures A10 and A11 to this OA; Notice dated 1506.2019, u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, , which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Statement of account, which is Annexure A13 to this OA.

¶21

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.26,70,108.88 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.

¶22

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 14.01.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Narindra Mehra, Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, has been filed.

¶23

3 OA/375/2024 BANK OF BARODA VS. DIKSHA SHARMA AND ANOTHER

¶24

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶25

It was argued by learned counsel through 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 A13 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,70,108.88 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Seventy Thousand One Hundred Eight and Paise Eighty Eight 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.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.95% p.a. with monthly rests from 30.01.2024 till the realization.

¶27

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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loan 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 uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶29

¶30

OA/375/2024

¶31

BANK OF BARODA VS. DIKSHA SHARMA AND ANOTHER

¶32

Rs.26,70,108.88 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Seventy Thousand One Hundred Eight and Paise Eighty Eight Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account 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 mortgaged property 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.

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 18.02.2026.

¶36

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.

¶37

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal. Dated: 06.02.2026.

¶38

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶39

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of Baroda v. Smt. Diksha Sharma and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Smt. Diksha Sharma 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Harpinder Singh and Others

Global Educational Trust and Others versus Central Bank of India and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Late Sh. Jarnail Singh through His Legal Heirs

State Bank of India versus Sh. Bhupinder Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Narinder Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Sh. Amitava Sen Gupta