Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Nitan Garg @ Sh. Nitan Kumar and Others

DRT2 Sept 2026OA/895/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 83,06,157.67 owed by borrowers and a guarantor. The tribunal modified the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a. and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 83,06,157.67 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing till realization; issue of Recovery Certificate; execution against mortgaged, hypothecated, and personal assets.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Nitan Garg… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.895/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 15.06.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 02.09.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited (a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Regulations Act, 1949) having its Head Office at 27 BKC, C 27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 and its Branch Office at Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, S.K. Complex, Agarsain Chowk, Main Road, Samana-Patiala Road, Samana, District Patiala, Punjab- 147101 and Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Landran Road, Khasra no. 678, Sohana, Mohali, Punjab- 140308 through its Authorized Representative, Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Landran Road, Khasra no. 678, Sohana, Mohali, Punjab- 140308

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Nitan Garg @Sh. Nitan Kumar, S/o Sh. Jai Pal, R/o House no. 249, Village Gajipur, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, Punjab147101

¶10

Sh. Heemanshu @Sh. Happy Kumar, S/o Sh. Jai Pal, R/o House no. 249, Village Gajipur, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, Punjab147101

¶11

Sh. Jaipal, S/o Sh. Hemraj, R/o Village Gajipur, HB no. 90, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, Punjab- 147101

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Rehan Chaudhary, Advocate for applicant (through VC)

¶15

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 29.08.2026)

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 83,06,157.67 (Rupees

¶18

2 OA/895/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NITAN GARG @NITAN KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶19

Eighty Three Lacs Six Thousand One Hundred Fifty Seven and Paise Sixty Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Resolution dated 18.09.2025, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 62.00 Lacs vide Application dated 13.03.2013.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs. 60.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 23.03.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶22

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 80K 00M situated at Village Ram Nagar @Bakhshiwala, Tehsil and District Patiala, Punjab vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 3654 dated 18.06.2013, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶23

Defendant nos. 1 and 2 hypothecated their crops vide Hypothecation Agreement dated 23.03.2013, which is Annexure A4 to this OA.

¶24

Documents executed: Sanction Scheme dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Guarantee Bond dated 23.03.2013, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 27.05.2026 along with postal receipt, 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. 83,06,157.67 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. 6. 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 29.08.2026.

¶26

3 OA/895/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NITAN GARG @NITAN KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited has been filed.

¶28

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶29

It was argued by learned counsel (through VC) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶30

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A8 to this OA, it is proved that defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. Defendants 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. 83,06,157.67 (Rupees Eighty Three Lacs Six Thousand One Hundred Fifty Seven and Paise Sixty Seven Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12%p.a. plus 2% penal interest with yearly rests from date of NPA till the realization.

¶32

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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, 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.

¶33

¶34

OA/895/2026 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. NITAN GARG @NITAN KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶35

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.83,06,157.67 (Rupees Eighty Three Lacs Six Thousand One Hundred Fifty Seven and Paise Sixty Seven 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 amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged property of defendant no. 1 and hypothecated assets of defendant nos. 1 and 2 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.

¶36

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 17.09.2026.

¶39

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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 02.09.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Nitan Garg @ Sh. Nitan Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Nitan Garg @ Sh. Nitan Kumar 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

Union Bank of India versus M/S Prakash Enterprises and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. gurwinder singh

Axis Bank Limited versus M/S Rattan Steel Works and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Pirthi Ram and Anr.

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Surinder Kumar

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Karminder Pal Singh and Another