Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Bilal Fruit Company

DRT24 Mar 2026OA/450/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of approximately 29 lakh rupees outstanding with interest. The court found the loan advance and guarantee valid, proceeding ex parte against non-appearing defendants, and directed recovery via sale of mortgaged land and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹29,22,858.96 with interest allowed; liability joint and several; recovery via sale of mortgaged land and hypothecated assets; issuance of Recovery Certificate; direction to distribute sal

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Bilal… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 450/2023 Date of Institution: 21.06.2022 Date of Decision: 24.03.2026

¶4

Jammu and Kashmir Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Hanwara South, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

M/s Bilal Fruit Company (Sole Proprietor) office at Lalbugh, Handwara, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶8

Mr. Abdul Ahad Tantray (Sole Proprietor) s/o Sh. Abdul Karim Tantray, r/o Lalbugh, Handwara, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶9

Mohd. Ashraf Tantray s/o Assudullah Tantray, r/o Lalbugh, Handwara, Jammu and Kashmir.

¶10

Mohd. Shafi Bhat s/o Abdul Jabbar Bhat, r/o Lalbugh, Handwara, Jammu and Kashmir. ……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Sh. Gaurav Thakur, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 13.03.2025 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of ₹29,22,858.96p with interest @10% per annum with monthly rests from 21.06.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Jammu and Kashmir Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹29,22,858.96p with interest against M/s Bilal Fruit Company and others (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 22.03.2010, it had granted a loan of ₹4.50 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor i.e. defendant No.2 in the form of C.C Limit for Business purpose. Again on 23.05.2012, at the request of the defendants, applicant bank enhanced the existing limit from ₹4.50Lacs to ₹7.00Lacs. To secure the loan, Defendant No.2 had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application).

¶17

¶18

Defendant Nos.3 and 4 stood as guarantors vide deed of guarantee dated 30.05.2012. The loan was chargeable to interest @10% per annum with monthly rests. On 30.04.2022, a sum of ₹29,22,858.96p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 24.03.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 13.03.2025, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Umesh Kumar, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-9.

¶21

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of

¶22

₹7.00 Lacs and on 30.04.2022, a sum of ₹29,22,858.96p was due.

¶23

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹29,22,858.96p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Twenty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Eight and Paise Ninety Six Only) with interest @10% per annum with monthly rests from 21.06.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶24

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶25

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶26

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on

¶27

01.05.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the

¶28

¶29

mortgaged land and hypothecated assets as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶30

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 24.03.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Bilal Fruit Company

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Bilal Fruit Company

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

Union Bank of India versus Darshan Plastics

Icici Bank Limited versus Manisha Ajay Sood

Capital Small Finance Bank Limited versus Sham Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Rajinder Pal Singh

Ms Rimpa and Simpa Enterprise And Ors. versus Indian Bank

c Nayarayanamma versus Canara Bank