Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Satya Naryan

DRT22 Jan 2026OA/687/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of dues. The court held that the bank proved the loan advance and outstanding amount, permitting recovery via sale of mortgaged properties or personal assets of the defaulters.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs.29,86,422.32 with interest; directed issuance of Recovery Certificate; directed sale of mortgaged property and personal assets.

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Satya Naryan — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 687/2023 Date of Institution: 13.04.2023 Date of Decision: 22.01.2026 HDFC Bank Limited at Sirsa, Haryana ……..Applicant Vs. 1. Sh. Satya Narayan S/o Sh. Ram Kumar, r/o House No. 241, Kumharia, Tehsil and District Sirsa-125055 2. Sh. Ram Kumar S/o Sh. Ramji Lal, r/o House No. 241, Kumharia, Tehsil and District Sirsa-125055 3. Sh. Rohtash Brij Lal S/o Sh. Brij Lal, House No. 15, Village Kagdna, Tehsil and District Sirsa -125055 …….Defendants Advocates Sh. Iqbal Mohammed, Counsel for the applicant bank Defendants- ex parte OA for the Recovery of Rs.29,86,422.32p with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 13.04.2023. ORDER 1. HDFC Bank Limited (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.29,86,422.32p with interest against Sh. Satya Narayan and Others (defendants).

¶4

¶5

Bank’s case is that on 07.04.2015, it had granted loans of Rs.11.05 Lacs in the form of Cash Credit Facility and Rs.5.50 Lacs in the form of Term Loan Facility to defendant Nos. 1 and 2 for agricultural purpose. Defendant No. 3 stood as guarantor. To secure the loans, the defendant No. 1 had mortgaged his property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loans were chargeable to interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests in Cash Credit Facility and @16% per annum with half-yearly rests in Term Loan Facility. On 01.10.2022, a sum of Rs.29,86,422.32p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶6

On 20.05.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 29.05.2024, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorised Representative along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A- 14. 5. 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 Rs.16.55 Lacs and on 01.10.2022, a sum of Rs.29,86,422.32p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.29,86,422.32p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Two and Thirty Two Paisa Only) with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 13.04.2023, 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

¶7

¶8

mortgaged property(ies) fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶9

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 10.03.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property(ies) and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. 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: 22.01.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh (Additional charge)

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Satya Naryan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Satya Naryan

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

Central Bank of India versus MD Rafikul Islam and Anr.

Punjab National Bank versus Oly Pramanik

Bank of Baroda versus M/s S.K. Enterprises

Indian Bank versus Mrs Sonal Rathi Proprietor of M/S Rathi Commodities and Ors.

Idbi Bank versus M/s Rahul Electric

Bank of India versus M/s Humara Pump Ram Janki