Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh Lakhbir Singh

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/888/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal permitted an application by Kotak Mahindra Bank for recovery of ₹1,01,71,704.85 plus interest from respondents who were originally loan recipients and guarantors. The bank proved the loan advance and due amount via affidavits; the court allowed recovery by sale of mortgaged land or other assets.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed for recovery of ₹1,01,71,704.85 with interest; recovery certificate to be issued; liability declared joint and several.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh Lakhbir Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 888/2022 Date of Institution: 29.04.2022 Date of Decision: 27.08.2026

¶4

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited (erstwhile ING Vyasa Bank Limited) having its branches all over India and a branch at SCO-153-154-155, Basement, Sector 9C, Chandigarh.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Lakhbir Singh s/o Sh. Kala Singh, r/o H.No.50, Village Katle, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶8

Smt. Joginder Kaur w/o Sh. Lakhbir Singh, r/o H.No.50, Village Katle, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶9

Sh. Pavittar Singh s/o Sh. Gurdev Singh, r/o H.No.33, Katle, Village Nangal Sohal, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Lakhwinder Singh s/o Sh. Darshan Singh, r/o H. No.74, Village Nangal Sohal, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶11

Sh. Gurdev Singh s/o Sh. Lakhbir Singh, r/o H.No.33, Katle, Village Nangal Sohal, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶12

Sh. Hardev Singh s/o Sh. Lakhbir Singh, r/o H.No.33, Katle, Village Nangal Sohal, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶13

Sh. Sukhminder Mahal s/o Sh. Gurdev Singh, r/o Village Katle, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶14

……….Defendants

¶15

Advocates

¶16

Sh. Rajan Puri, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- ex parte vide order dated 27.03.2026 .

¶17

OA for the Recovery of ₹1,01,71,704.85p with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 29.04.2022.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹1,01,71,704.85p with interest against Sh. Lakhbir Singh and others (defendants).

¶20

¶21

Bank’s case is that on 26.03.2013, it had granted a loan of ₹75.00 Lacs to defendant Nos.1 to 3 in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant Nos.1 and 2 had mortgaged their land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant Nos.4 to 7 stood as guarantors for the K.C.C. Limit vide Guarantee Bond dated 28.06.2013. The loan was chargeable to interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 23.03.2022, a sum of ₹1,01,71,704.85p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶22

On 25.05.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 27.03.2026, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶23

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-15. 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 ₹75.00 Lacs and on 23.03.2022, a sum of ₹1,01,71,704.85p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹1,01,71,704.85p (Rupees One Crore One Lac Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred Four and Paise Eighty Five Only) with interest @12% per annum with half-yearly rests from 29.04.2022, 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 mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶24

¶25

7.	Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8.	Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9.	Parties are directed to appear before	Recovery Officer on
28.09	.2026.
10.	A Copy of this order along with Recovery	Certificate be sent to
the R	ecovery Officer as well as the parties.
Pron Dated MANOJ KAL	ounced in the open Court. : 27.08.2026 RA	(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh Lakhbir Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh Lakhbir Singh

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 Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank