Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Viraaj Enterprises and Another

DRT20 Jun 2026OA/486/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three-Judge Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte application by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of outstanding loans. The court decreed the payment of principal, costs, and simple interest from the date of filing until realization.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs. 62,34,206.39 jointly and Rs. 3,572.00 individually with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. till realization; Recovery Certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Viraaj Enterprises… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 486/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 17.04.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 20.06.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited having its Registered Office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai- 400013 and also at Plot no. I-15, Sector 101, Alpha IT City, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab through its Authorized Representative, Sh. Rajendra Prasad

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/S Viraaj Enterprises through its Proprietor, Sh. Amit Sharma, C/o Street no. 4, Kabir Nagar, Daba Road, Ludhiana, Punjab141014

¶10

Sh. Amit Sharma, S/o Sh. Narinder Kumar, R/o House no. 3267, Sector 38, Focal Point, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana, Punjab141010

¶11

…..Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Tejinder Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gagandeep Toni, Advocate for applicant

¶14

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 16.06.2026)

¶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. 62,37,778.39 (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Eight and Paise Thirty Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Authorized Representative of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 15.04.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of New Two Wheeler Loan of Rs. 70,500.00 vide Loan Application Form dated 31.10.2022, which is Annexure A2 to

¶18

2 OA NO. 486/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS. M/S VIRAAJ ENTERPRISES AND ANOTHER

¶19

this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of CC Limit of Rs. 50.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 33.71 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 10.05.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned New Two Wheeler Loan of Rs.70,500.00. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs, Term Loan- I of Rs. 13.70 Lacs and Term Loan- II of Rs. 20.00 Laacs vide Sanction Letter dated 09.06.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. 4. Defendant no. 2 hypothecated his movable asset namely CD 110 Dream Deluxe bearing Registration no. PB10HY0217, Chassis no. ME4JC897KNG162550 and Engine no. JC89EG1162796 vide RC filed on 18.06.2026.

¶20

Defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 hypothecated their stock in trade, book debts and receivables and plant and machinery vide Deed of Hypothecation dated 15.06.2023, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed: Hypothecation dated 31.10.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Term Loan Agreements, Master Facility Agreement, and Letter of Continuing Guarantee, all dated 15.06.2023, which are Annexure A6 to A8 and A10 to this OA; Statement of Account, which are Annexure A11 to A14 to this OA and Legal Notice dated 03.04.2025 along with postal receipts, which are Annexure A15 to A17 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 62,37,778.39, 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. 6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal, but no one appeared on behalf of the defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 16.06.2026.

¶22

3 OA NO. 486/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS. M/S VIRAAJ ENTERPRISES AND ANOTHER

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Authorized Representative, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed.

¶24

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶25

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

¶26

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A17 to this OA, it is proved that defendant no. 2 and thereafter defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 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 bank. 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 bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 62,34,206.39 (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs Thirty Four Thousand Two Hundred Six and Paise Thirty Nine Only) from the defendants, jointly and severally and Rs. 3,572.00 (Rupees Three Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Two Only) from defendant no. 2, along with interest, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶27

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @20%p.a. from the date of filing of the application till the realization.

¶28

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.

¶29

4 OA NO. 486/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS. M/S VIRAAJ ENTERPRISES AND ANOTHER

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.62,34,206.39 (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs Thirty Four Thousand Two Hundred Six and Paise Thirty Nine Only) jointly and severally and defendant no. 2 is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.3,572.00 (Rupees Three Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Two Only) 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 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.

¶31

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 06.07.2026. 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: 20.06.2026

¶32

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

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Viraaj Enterprises and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Viraaj Enterprises 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

Union Bank of India versus M/S P.M. Enterprises and Others

The Federal Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Vajir Singh Alias Sh. Wazir Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Sandip Kumar

Union Bank of India versus M/S D R Selections and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Amandeep Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Boota Singh