Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. M/s Deepak Enterprises through Its Proprietor- Mr. Deepak Wadhwan

DRT29 Jan 2026OA/877/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues including interest and costs, issued an injunction against asset transfer, and ordered the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Decree for payment of Rs. 79,23,909.11 with interest, injunction against asset disposal, and issuance of recovery certificate.

Hdfc Bank versus M/s Deepak Enterprises through Its… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL : JABALPUR

¶2

(for the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh)

¶3

(Presiding Officer - Hon'ble Shri Pravas Kumar Singh)

¶4

Original Application No. - 877123

¶5

HDFC Bank Limited Savitri, GCF Road, CiviI Lines, Jabatpur (M.P.)

¶6

..... Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1 M/s Deepak Enterprises Through its proprietor:^- Mr. Deepak Wadhawan Shop No. 9, Kaushatya Plaza, Prem Nagar, Near Post Office, Madan Mahat, Jabatpur, Madhya Pradesh - 482001 Atso at :- Btock No. 3, Sarkar Hitts View Cotony, Danav Baba, Shakti Nagar, Jabatpur, Madhya Pradesh - 482001

¶9

Mr. Deepak Wadhawan S/o Shri Hariom Wadhawan Shop No. 9, Kaushatya Ptaza, Prem Nagar, Near Post Office, Madan Mahat, Jabatpur, Madhya Pradesh - 482001

¶10

Atso at :- Btock No. 3, Sarkar Hitts View Cotony, Danav Baba, Shakti Nagar, Jabatpur, Madhya Pradesh - 482001

¶11

Mrs. Shiba Wadhawan D/o Shri Hariom Wadhawan Shop No. 9, Kaushatya Ptaza, Prem Nagar, Near Post Office, Madan Mahat, Jabatpur, Madhya Pradesh - 482001

¶12

Atso at :- Btock No. 3, Sarkar Hitts View Cotony, Danav Baba, Shakti Nagar, Jabatpur, Madhya Pradesh - 487001

¶13

..... Defendants

¶14

Counsel for the Appticant : Shri Sanjeev Dubey , Advocate

¶15

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶16

tt)

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

loated^{:7fF.tanuary1 20261}

¶19

The Appticant-Bank has fited the present Original Apptication u/s 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act on 28107/23 against the Defendants for recovery of Rs. 29,23,909.11 (Rupees Twenty Nine^Lakh Twenty Three Thousand Nine Hundred Nine and eteven^paisa onty)^atong with interest and other retiefs as stated.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that on the^requestof Defendant No.-1 through its^proprietor Defendant^{No.-2,the AppticantBank}

¶21

¶22

oA877123

¶23

sanctioned the ODAP facitity of Rs. 25^Lac on07/10120^{and the term loan-} GECL of Rs. 3,98,994/- on21/05/2021 and in^{considerationof the same the} Defendant No. 1 as principal borrower, Defendant No. 2^{as proprietor of} Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 3 as^guarantor in addition to^execution of loan documents have atso created equitabte mortgage over^the immovabte property, i.e., Property Situated at Mouja Maheshpur,^Bandobast No. 662, P H No. 7816, Commerciat Shop No. 09 situated at^ground ftoor^of Koushtya Ptaza, Khasra No. 9/1 , 9/5, 916, New Rl Circle- Garha, Madan Mahal Ward, Jabatpur (M.P.) owned by defendant no. 2 and 3, Area 222 sq. ft. & construction area^- 184.5 sq. ft. The Defendants availed the credit facitities but the account became irregutar and. faited to tiquidate the outstanding dues despite issuance of Lega[ Notice dated 11/0612023 and initiation of action under the Securitisation Act, by the Appticant Bank. The Appticant-Bank has retied upon the documents at Ex. A-1 to A-14 which were proved by Shri Ashish Rawat, Manager.

¶24

Despite service of notice, the Defendants neither appeared nor fited written statement. They were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 08104/24. There is therefore, no reason to disbetieve the contentions of the Bank. Considering the facts of the case, I opine that the Defendants are jointty and severatty tiabte to pay the claim amount together with interest and costs. The Appticant-Bank in its apptication has claimed interest @8.90% ptus 9.10% p.a. with penal interest. However, I feel it fair and reasonabte to grant interest @10% p.a. simpte pendentetite and future titt reatization of the dues. The mortgaged property is tiabte to be sotd for recovery of amount due atong with the personal properties and assets of the Defendants.

¶25

sY"

¶26

The Originat Apptication is attowed and it is ordered as under-

¶27

i) The Defendants do pay jointty and severatty Rs. 79,23,909.11 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakh Twenty Three Thousand Nine Hundred Nine and eteven paisa onty) together with pendentetite and future interest @10% per annum simpte from the date of fiting of the oA, i.e., 28/07/23, with costs titt its reatization.

¶28

ii) The Appticant Bank is entitted to setl the mortgaged as wett as personal properties and assets of the Defendants for reatization of its dues. The Defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from

¶29

¶30

oA877t23

¶31

depteting, transferring, encumbering, atienating or in any way deal.ing with their properties/assets without first paying the ctaim of the Appticant Bank.

¶32

iii) A Recovery certificate be issued uls 19(zz) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. The appticant bank may fite a memo of cost within 7 days for preparing Recovery Certificate.

¶33

Judgment pronounced in the open court on this 29th Day of January, 2026.

¶34

q*'{,^' (Pravas Kuinar Singh) DRT Lucknow lncharge DRT Jabatpur

Hdfc Bank v. M/s Deepak Enterprises through Its Proprietor- Mr. Deepak Wadhwan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. M/s Deepak Enterprises through Its Proprietor- Mr. Deepak Wadhwan

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Abhishek Pratap

Central Bank of India versus M/S Maheshwari Ayurvedic Stores

Icici Bank Limited versus Sadiya

Central Bank of India versus Atul Kumar Tiwari S/O Shri Dinesh Prasad Sharma

Bank of India versus Praneeta

Shivani Traders versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited