Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Gorakhnath Traders and Others

DRT29 Apr 2026OA/825/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This DRT allowed an ex-parte Original Application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 21.94 lakhs advanced as a term loan to a trader. The Tribunal declared the defendants liable for the principal, costs, and granted simple interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 24%.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.21,94,151.44 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from date of OA till realization; Recovery Certificate issued.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Gorakhnath Traders and… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.825/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 24.06.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.04.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., a Body Corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 and having Branches all over India and one of its Branch Offices situated at SCO no. 131-132-133, 2^nd Floor, Apra Tower, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141001, through its Manager, Sh. Rakesh Kumar

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/S Gorakhnath Traders, through its Proprietor, H. no. 1945, Pana (8), Village and Post Office Titoli, District Rohtak, Haryana124001

¶10

Sh. Suresh Kumar, S/o Sh. Ram Bhagat, Proprietor M/S Gorakhnath Traders, R/o H. no. 1945, Pana (8), Village and Post Office Titoli, District Rohtak, Haryana- 124001

¶11

2^nd Address: H. no. 1995, Pana (8), Village and Post Office Titoli, District Rohtak, Haryana- 124001

¶12

Sh. Shamsher Singh, S/o Sh. Ram Bhagat, R/o Village and Post Office Titoli (88), District Rohtak, Haryana- 124001

¶13

……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Rahul Garg, Advocate for Applicant

¶16

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 23.04.2026)

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 21,94,151.44 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Ninety Four Thousand One Hundred Fifty One and Paise Forty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to

¶19

2 OA NO. 825/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. M/S GORAKHNATH TRADERS AND OTHERS

¶20

institute the Original Application vide Resolution dated 29.11.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs. 42.00 Lacs for purchase of Commercial Vehicle vide NonIndividual Customer Relation-cum-Application Form dated 02.12.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶22

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs. 42,69,570.00 for purchase of Commercial Vehicle vide Loan-cum-Guarantee Agreement dated 05.12.2022, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶23

Defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 hypothecated his Commercial Vehicle namely Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Blazo55 TR BS6 36 CL CB bearing Registration no. HR46F9743, Chassis No. MA1UAARXFN6H73012 and Engine no. PHNZH15003 vide Virtual RC filed on 24.04.2026 through Diary no. 7320/2026 and Tax Invoice dated 29.11.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA.

¶24

Documents executed: DP Note and Power of Attorney dated 05.12.2022, which are Annexure A5 and A6 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated 24.05.2025, which is Annexure A7 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶25

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. 21,94,151.44, 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.

¶26

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 23.04.2026.

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, h as been filed.

¶28

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶29

3 OA NO. 825/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. M/S GORAKHNATH TRADERS AND OTHERS

¶30

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.

¶31

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A8 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 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 brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.21,94,151.44 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Ninety Four Thousand One Hundred Fifty One and Paise Forty Four 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.

¶32

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24%p.a. with monthly rests from 13.05.2025 till the realization.

¶33

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 vehicle, 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,94,151.44 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Ninety Four Thousand One Hundred Fifty One and Paise Forty Four 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

¶34

¶35

OA NO. 825/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. M/S GORAKHNATH TRADERS AND OTHERS

¶36

amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated vehicle 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.

¶37

Any other application pending stands disposed of .

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 20.05.2026.

¶40

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.

¶41

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶42

Dated: 29.04.2026

¶43

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶44

Presiding Officer,

¶45

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Gorakhnath Traders and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Gorakhnath Traders 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

Canara Bank versus Sh. Ashwani Jindal and Others

Union Bank of India versus Ms Shree Shyam Enterprises and Another

State Bank of India versus Smt. Sarita Vohra and Others

Canara Bank versus Sh. Satbir Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pargat Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Lakhvir Singh