Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Shree Ganpati Enterprises and Others

DRT30 Apr 2026OA/641/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte Original Application filed by a bank against borrowers and a guarantor. While granting recovery of principal and costs, the tribunal reduced the applicant's claimed interest rate from 18% to 8% per annum and ordered the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Decree for recovery of Rs.22,20,882.75 with simple interest @8% p.a.; Relief to enforce claim through sale of mortgaged properties; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.641/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.05.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 30.04.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Ltd, a banking company, incorporated under Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai 400013, Maharashtra, having one of its branch, HDFC Bank Branch at B-II-1848, Mata Rani Road, Ludhiana(Pb), through its duly Authorized Signatory and Authorized Officer Sh. Sunil Kalra, working as Senior Manager currently posted at Plot No. I-15, 3^rd Floor, Alpha IT City, Sector 101, Mohali (Pb)-160062

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Shree Ganpati Enterprises, a Sole Proprietorship Firm, through its Proprietor Smt. Sunita Kakkar, having its Place of Business situated at Shop No. 15-C, 1^st floor, Minerva Market, Near Clock Tower, Ludhiana, Pin-141008

¶10

Smt. Sunita Kakkar w/o Sh. Anil Kumar Kakkar R/o H.No. 334, Mota Singh Nagar, Jalandhar, Pin-144008

¶11

2^nd Address: House No. 360, Bank Enclave Jalandhar, Punjab144003

¶12

Sh. Anil Kumar Kakkar s/o Sh. Parshottam Lal Kakkar R/o H.No.

¶13

334, Mota Singh Nagar, Jalandhar, Pin-144008

¶14

2^nd Address: House No. 360, Bank Enclave Jalandhar, Punjab144003

¶15

…….Defendants

¶16

Advocates:

¶17

Argued by Sh. Harinder Kumar, Advocate for the applicant None for Defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 30.03.2026)

¶18

2 OA/641/2024 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS MESSRS SHREE GANPATI ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

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.22,20,882.75 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Seventy Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sunil Kalra, Senior Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution of Bank Official dated 16.07.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant No.2, approached the applicant for the grant of ODAP limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 16.09.2013, which is Annexures A2 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant No.2, approached the applicant for the grant of GECL Loan of Rs.3.00 Lacs. Defendant No.3 stood as Guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned ODAP limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 01.10.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned renewal of ODAP Limit of 15.00 Lacs vide Renewal Sanction Letter dated 23.09.2014, 20.09.2016 which are Annexures A13 & A14 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the renewal of said limit vide Renewal Sanction Letter dated 26.09.2017, 18.09.2018 & 18.10.2018, which are Annexures A17 to A19 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned GECL Loan of Rs.3.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 14.08.2020, which is Annexure A21 to this OA.

¶22

Defendant no.2 mortgaged her immovable property i.e. Commercial Property measuring 6.61 sq yds situated in Shop No.15-C, Minerva AC Market, GT Road, Near Clock Tower, Ludhiana, Punjab vide Sale Deed bearing Vasika No. 3625 dated 17.05.2013 along with translation, which is Annexure A11 to this OA.

¶23

3 OA/641/2024 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS MESSRS SHREE GANPATI ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶24

Documents executed: DP Note, Master facility Agreement, Letter of continuing Security, Deed of Indemnity, Letter of continuing Guarantee, all dated 09.10.2013 which are Annexures A4 to A8 to this OA; Memorandum regarding Equitable Mortgage dated 15.10.2013 which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Declaration cum Undertaking dated 15.10.2013, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Affidavit dated 12.10.2013 which is Annexure A12 to this OA; DP Note, Amendment Agreement, both dated 27.09.2016, which are Annexures A15 & A16 to this OA; Addendum dated 18.10.2019, which is Annexure A20 to this OA; Facility cum Hypothecation Agreement, Declaration cum Undertaking, Undertaking from Borrower, Memorandum regarding Equitable Mortgage, Letter of continuing Guarantee, all dated 18.08.2020 which are Annexures A22 to A26 to this OA; Valuation Report dated 08.10.2013, which is Annexure A27 to this OA; Statement of Accounts with certificate, which are Annexures A28 & A30 to this OA; Memorandum of Interest, which is Annexure A29 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 07.07.2023, which is Annexure A31 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts, there was a debit of Rs.22,20,882.75 which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices 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 defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 30.03.2026 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sunil Kalra , Senior Manager , HDFC Bank Limited, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶25

4 OA/641/2024 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS MESSRS SHREE GANPATI ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶26

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.

¶27

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A31 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants 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, both the accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.22,20,882.75 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Seventy Five 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @18% p.a. with monthly rests from 21.10.2023 till the realization. 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 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 both 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.22,20,882.75 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Thousand Eight

¶28

5 OA/641/2024 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS MESSRS SHREE GANPATI ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

¶29

Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Seventy Five Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both 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 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.

¶30

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.05.2026

¶33

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.

¶34

Dated: 30.04.2026.

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶36

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Shree Ganpati Enterprises and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Shree Ganpati Enterprises 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

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Ranjeet Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. chamkaur singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Nawab Resturant and Another

Savita Prabhakar versus Punjab National Bank and Others

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Brij Pal and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Parveen Kumar and Others