Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Mr Krishna Kumar Bhardwaj

DRT21 Feb 2026OA/69/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues of Rs. 39,61,316.68 as on 21.11.2022, along with interest and costs, after the respondent proprietor failed to appear or defend the case.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 39,61,316.68 as on 21.11.2022 with future interest @18% p.a. and costs from the sale of hypothecated stocks, book debts, and other movable and immovable properties of the defendant.

Hdfc Bank versus Mr Krishna Kumar Bhardwaj — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No. 69 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No.69 of 2023

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd.

¶6

Through Department for Special Operations 5th Floor, Ansal Classique Tower Plot no.1, 3 Block, Community Centre Opposite Surya Continental Hotel Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr. Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj sic) Mr. Jagdish Bhardwaj

¶10

Proprietor of M/s Owins SSS India Plot no.4, Pocket E, Sector 3 Bawana Industrial area, DSIIDC Delhi-110039

¶11

Also at:

¶12

Mr. Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj SRS 45, Ramlila ground, Peeragarhi Sundar Vihar, Delhi-110087

¶13

Defendant

¶14

Present: Ms. Sunanda Kumari, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶15

Date of Reserve: 03.02.2026

¶16

Date of Pronouncement: 21.02.2026

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 13.12.2022 through Sh. Anirudh Bhargav, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.39,61,316.68 (Rupees

¶19

¶20

O.A. No. 69 of 2023

¶21

Thirty Nine Lacs Sixty One Thousand Three Hundred Sixteen and paisa Sixty Eight only) as on 21.11.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @18% per annum from 22.11.2022 till the date of realization along with costs.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant as proprietor of M/s Owins SSS India engaged in manufacturing & trading of car automotive accessories etc. vide their application dated 16.03.2021, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility for a sum of Rs.100.00 lacs (Rupees One Crore only) for working capital requirements on 09.07.2021 @9% interest per annum against hypothecation of stocks and book debts. Defendant also agreed to pay penal interest @2% for non-submission of stock statements and overdue interest @18% in case of overdue delays/default in repayment.

¶23

In order to avail the loan facility, the defendant submitted loan application dated 16.03.2021 and executed Master Facility Agreement, Deed of Hypothecation, Memorandum relating to charge over Fixed Deposits, Letter of Continuing Guarantee, Power of Attorney, Net Worth Certificate, CRI Undertaking, Consent letter on 09.07.2021 with the applicant bank.

¶24

That in order to secure the loan facility, the defendant hypothecated all the stock in trade, book debts towards the applicant bank on 09.07.2021.

¶25

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to regularize the account with the applicant bank despite several

¶26

¶27

O.A. No. 69 of 2023

¶28

requests and reminders. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.07.2022 as per RBI guidelines and issued notice dated 29.10.2022 but defendant failed to regularize the account and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶29

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite of proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 12.12.2025, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

¶30

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Anirudh Bhargav, authorized representative of the applicant bank, who has proved the documents as Board Resolution, Loan Application, Sanction Letter, Master Facility Agreement, Deed of Hypothecation, Letter of Continuing Guarantee, Power of Attorney, Undertaking and Letter, Networth Certificate, CRI undertaking, Consent Letter, Insurance Letter, Notice alongwith Postal Receipts, Statement of Account duly certified under Banker's Books Evidence Act marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/17 (Colly).

¶31

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶32

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant

5d-

O.A. No. 69 of 2023

bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶37

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶38

ORDER

¶39

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.39,61,316.68 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Sixty One Thousand Three Hundred Sixteen and paisa Sixty Eight only) as on 21.11.2022 together with pendentelite and future interest ©18% per annum with monthly rests from 22.11.2022 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stocks & book debts etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendant.

¶40

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶41

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 23.04.2026.

¶42

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶43

-5- SG(_

¶44

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶45

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 21.02.2026

¶46

Hdfc Bank v. Mr Krishna Kumar Bhardwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Mr Krishna Kumar Bhardwaj

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

Sakeena versus Cherpalcheri Cooperative Urban Bank

Jainy Jenson versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Abdul Sathar Pookkattil versus South Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/S S.F. Enterprises

Canara Bank versus Reeta Jain

Punjab National Bank versus M/S J.J. India