Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S Lajpat Rai Devinder Kumar and Others

DRT21 Apr 2026OA/53/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of a loan amount of Rs.31.45 lakhs plus interest. The court reduced the claimed interest rate from 18% to 8% p.a. while ordering recovery via sale of mortgaged properties under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.31.45 lakhs with 8% p.a. interest; direction to recover via sale of mortgaged properties under SARFAESI Act.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Lajpat Rai Devinder Kumar and… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 53/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.11.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 21.04.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, a Banking Company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act 1956, having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai 400013 and one of its Branch Office, amongst others, at Lalru Mandi District SAS NAGAR (Mohali) (Punjab), being represented through its duly authorized official, Sh. Narender Kumar Nanda, Senior Manager, Department For Special Operations, HDFC Bank Limited, Regional Office, 3rd Floor, Plot No. I-15, Alpha IT City, Sector-101, Mohali (Punjab).

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/S Lajpat Rai Devinder Kumar, a Partnership Firm consisting of Sh. Lajpat Rai S/o Sh. Sanwal Dass and Sh. Dev Raj S/o Sh. Aya Ram, as its partners and having place of business, at Shop No. 12, New Grain Market, Lalru Mandi, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali140501

¶10

Sh. Lajpat Rai S/o Sh. Sanwal Dass, R/o Opposite PNB, Lalru Mandi, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab-140501

¶11

Sh. Dev Raj S/o Sh. Aya Ram, R/o H. No. 2542, Part-6, Jai Maa Colony, Lalru, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140501 (Since Deceased), through LRS

¶12

(i) Smt. Kanta Devi W/o Late Sh. Dev Raj, R/o H. No. 2542, Part-6, Jai Maa Colony, Lalru, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140501

¶13

(ii) Sh. Mohit Kumar S/o Late Sh. Dev Raj, R/o H. No. 2542, Part-6, Jai Maa Colony, Lalru, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140501

¶14

(iii) Smt. Roop Rani alias Divyanshi Khattar, W/o Sh. Sunil Khattar, D/o L ate Sh. Dev Raj, R/o H. No. 2542, Part-6, Jai Maa Colony, Lalru, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140501

¶15

(iv) Smt. Reena Chawla W/o Sh. Deepak Chawla, D/o L ate Sh. Dev Raj , R/o 307, Street No.3, Tripadi, Patiala (Punjab)-147004

¶16

…….Defendants

¶17

2 OA/53/2024 HDFC BANK VS. MESSRS LAJPAT RAI DEVIDER KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶18

Advocates:

¶19

Argued by Sh. Satish Kumar Arora, Advocate for applicant

¶20

None for defendants (ex-parte vide order dated 16.04.2026)

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.31,45,366.11 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Eleven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Narender Kumar Nanda, Senior Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board resolution dated 16.07.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 through its partners defendant no. 2 and defendant no 3 (since deceased) approached the applicant for grant of ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 14.06.2013 along with Partnership Deed and GST Registration Certificate, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its partners defendant no. 2 and defendant no 3 (since deceased) approached the applicant for request of renewal of ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Renewal Request and Renewal Letter dated 25.07.2014. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its partners defendant no. 2 and defendant no 3 (since deceased), approached the applicant for request of renewal of ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide renewal request and renewal letter dated 03.01.2015, 04.08.2015 & 11.08.2016. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its partners defendant no. 2 and defendant no 3 (since deceased), approached the applicant for request of enhancement of ODAP Limit of Rs. 25.00 lacs to Rs.40.00 Lacs vide Request Letter dated 06.11.2017.

¶23

3 OA/53/2024 HDFC BANK VS. MESSRS LAJPAT RAI DEVIDER KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶24

The applicant Bank sanctioned the ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 15.07.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 2 and Defendant no 3 (since deceased) stood as Guarantor. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned renewal of ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 27.07.2014, which is Annexure A12 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned renewal of ODAP of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 03.01.2015, 04.08.2015 & 11.08.2016, which are Annexures A13, A14 & A15 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned enhancement of ODAP Limit of Rs.25.00 lacs to Rs.40.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 06.11.2017, which is Annexure A18 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned renewal of ODAP Limit of Rs.40.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 11.08.2020 & 02.12.2021, which are Annexures A21 & A22 to this OA.

¶25

Defendant no. 1 through its partners defendant no. 2 and defendant no 3 (since deceased), mortgaged its immovable property i.e. Shop no. 128, measuring 100 sq. yards, situated in New Grain Market, Lalru Mandi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab, vide Title Deed bearing Vasika no. 4357 dated 13.06.2011 along with Allotment letter dated 04.04.2011, NEC dated 11.07.2011 and Possession letter dated 13.07.2011, along with its translations, which are Annexures A10 and A11 to this OA.

¶26

Documents Executed: Letter of Continuing Security and Demand Promissory Note, Master Facility Agreement, Deed of Indemnity, Declaration cum Indemnity, Letter of Continuing Guarantee, all dated 22.07.2013, which are Annexures A4 to A8 to this OA; Memorandum regarding creation of mortgage, dated 22.07.2013, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note dated 11.08.2016, which is Annexure A16 to this OA; Amendment Agreement dated 11.08.2016,

¶27

4 OA/53/2024 HDFC BANK VS. MESSRS LAJPAT RAI DEVIDER KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶28

which is Annexure A17 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note dated 15.11.2017, which is Annexure A19 to this OA; Amendment Agreement dated 17.1.2017, which is Annexure A20 to this OA; Addendum Agreement dated 14.08.2020, which is Annexure A23 to this OA; Death Certificate of Defendant no. 3, dated 15.09.2020, which is Annexure A24 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 08.02.2023, which is Annexure A25 to this OA; Statement of account with certificate and Memoranda Interest, which are Annexures A26 and 27 to this OA; Valuation Report dated 18.07.2013, which is Annexure A28 to this OA. 5. 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.31,45,366.11, 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.

¶29

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 16.04.2026.

¶30

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Narender Kumar Nanda, Senior Manager, HDFC Bank Limited 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 Annexure A1 to A28 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached the 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

¶31

5 OA/53/2024 HDFC BANK VS. MESSRS LAJPAT RAI DEVIDER KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶32

brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.31,45,366.11 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Eleven Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶33

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @18.00% p.a. from 01.11.2023 the date of filing of the application till the realization.

¶34

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, undertaking of the defendants, 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 simple interest @08.00% p.a. in 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.

¶35

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.31,45,366.11 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Eleven Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00% 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 properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal

¶36

6 OA/53/2024 HDFC BANK VS. MESSRS LAJPAT RAI DEVIDER KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶37

assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶38

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 12.05.2026

¶40

Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant bank 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: 21.04.2026.

¶41

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶42

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S Lajpat Rai Devinder Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S Lajpat Rai Devinder Kumar 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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Raj Transport Company and Another

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Sahib Knitwear and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Smt. Ravinder Kaur and Others

Capital Small Finance Bank Limited versus Sh. Harpreet Singh through His Legal Heirs and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Gursewak Singh

Canara Bank versus Sh Baldev Singh and Others