Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Narinder Singh and Another

DRT23 Feb 2026OA/592/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant's application for recovery of a dues of Rs. 27,76,266.00 outstanding on a KCC loan. The Tribunal directed the debtor to pay the principal amount plus simple interest at 8.00% p.a. and authorized recovery through sale of mortgaged assets or attachment of personal property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,76,266.00 plus simple interest at 8.00% p.a. from the date of filing until realization, enforceable via sale of assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Narinder… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 592/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 13.05.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.02.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, corporate body constituted under the Banking Companies Act-V of 1970, having its Registered Office at 27, BKC, C-27, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai and having one of its Branch Office at SCO No.153-154, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh through its Senior Manager Sh. Munish Sharma.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Narinder Singh R/o Village Jassowal, Tehsil and District Patiala, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Balkar Singh S/o of Sh. Mahinder Singh, R/o H. No. 53-C, Ranjeet Nagar, Bhadson Road, Patiala, Tehsil and District Patiala, Punjab.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Sukhvinder Singh, Advocate for applicant

¶14

Defendants already ex parte vide order dated 06.06.2025

¶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. 27,76,266.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 14.03.2011.

¶18

2 OA/592/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶19

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs, vide Sanction Letter dated 24.03.2011, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land Measuring 19Bighas-4Biswa Situated at Village Uccha Gaon, Tehsil and District Patiala, Punjab, vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 2085 dated 28.04.2011, along with its translation, which are Annexures A11 & A12 t o this OA.

¶21

Documents executed: Scheme of amalgamation of ING Vysya Bank sanction by RBI dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; D.P. Note, Take Delivery Letter, Hypothecation Agreement, Consent Letter Executed by Borrower, Consent Letter Executed by Guarantor, Undertakings Cum Letter of Authorization for Insuring Crop and other Movables Assets, Undertaking, all dated 24.03.2011, which are Annexures A4 to A10 to this OA; Deed of Guarantee dated 24.03.2011, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Legal Notice and dated 03.05.2024 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Statements of Accounts with interest chart and certificate, which are Annexures A15 and A16 to this OA.

¶22

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. 27,76,266.00 which is recoverable and the defendants was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶23

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 06.06.2025.

¶24

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank h as been filed.

¶25

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

3 OA/592/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶27

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 Annexures A1 to A16 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants 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 applicant. 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. 27,76,266.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Six 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.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. with 2% penal interest from 26.04.2024 the realization.

¶29

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/mortgaged properties, 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 uniform simple interest @8.00%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.

¶30

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

¶31

4 OA/592/2024 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NARINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶32

Rs.27,76,266.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Six 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 hypothecated assets/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 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 09.03.2026.

¶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: 23.02.2026.

¶38

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶39

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Narinder Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Narinder Singh 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Rafiq Ahmad and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kulwant Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Raghbir Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Late Sh. Jassa Singh through His Legal Heirs

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Amarjit Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Dewan Singh