Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Sukhdev Singh and Others

DRT2 Mar 2026OA/91/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This DRT allowed an ex-parte application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd against borrowers and guarantors for a KCC loan default. The Tribunal confirmed liability for Rs. 52.52 Lakhs and fixed simple interest at 8% per annum, permitting recovery via sale of mortgaged assets under SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 52,52,820.05 jointly and severally from defendants along with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing till realization.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Sukhdev Singh and… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 91/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.12.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 02.03.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, a banking company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 and licensed under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its Registered Office, at 27BKC, C27,G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 and the successor to ING Vyasa Bank Limited under the Amalgamation scheme dated 01.04.2015, sanctioned by the Reserve Bank of India in exercise of the powers contained in Sub Section (4) of Section 44A of the Banking Regulation Act,1949, having its branches all over India including its branch at S.C.O.153-154-155, Sector 9/C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, through its Authorized Representatives Sh. Munish Sharma.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Sukhdev Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh R/o H.no.355, Part-3, Village Marhi Megha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab143410.

¶10

Sh. Nirmal Singh S/o Sh. Santa Singh, through its GPA Sh. Sukhdev Singh, R/o H.No.117, Village Marhi Megha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab-143410.

¶11

Sh. Kashmiri Singh S/o Sh. Tara Singh R/o H. No. 44, Village Jamalpur, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab-143410.

¶12

Sh. Gursewak Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o H. No. 355, Part3, Village Marhi Megha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab143410.

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by, Sh. Rajan Puri, Advocate for applicant (through VC) Defendants already ex parte vide order dated 21.02.2025

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993,

¶18

2 OA//91/2023 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SUKHDEV SINGH AND OTHERS

¶19

against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 52,52,820.05 (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty and Paise Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 27.06.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant KCC Limit of Rs.35.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 21.09.2010. Defendant no. 2 (through his GPA) and defendant nos. 3 and 4 stood as guarantors.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 35.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 05.10.2010, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant nos. 1 and defendant no. 2 (through his GPA) mortgaged their immovable property i.e. Land Measuring 89Kanal12Marla (58K-09M in the name of defendant no. 1 and 31K-093M in the name of defendant no. 2) situated at Village Mari Megha I, II, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed dated 25.11.2010, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Advocate Letter dated 26.11.2010 for marking of lien, which is Annexure A12 to this OA. Documents executed: Order of Amalgamation of ING Vyas a Bank with Kotak Mahindra Bank dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; General Power of Attorney (GPA) executed by defendant no. 2 bearing vasika no. 37 dated 15.11.2010, along with its translation, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Pronote, Take Delivery Letter to DPN, Hypothecation Agreement, Consent Letter exulted by the Borrower, Undertaking Cum Letter of Authorization for insuring crop and other movables assets, Consent executed by all the defendants, Guarantee Bond, Consent Letter executed by guarantors, all dated 29.11.2010, which are Annexures A5 to A10, A13 and A14 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 22.12.2022, along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Statement of Account with certificate, which is Annexure A16 to this OA.

¶22

3 OA//91/2023 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SUKHDEV SINGH AND OTHERS

¶23

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. 52,52,820.05, which is recoverable and the defendants was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 21.02.2025.

¶25

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

¶26

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶27

It was argued by learned counsel through video conferencing that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A16 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 applicant. 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.52,52,820.05 (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty and Paise Five 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. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.50%p.a. with 2% penal interest from 18.11.2022 the realization. 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 assets/mortgaged

¶28

4 OA//91/2023 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. SUKHDEV SINGH AND OTHERS

¶29

properties, 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 uniform simple interest @8.00%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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.52,52,820.05 (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty and Paise Five Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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 properties/ hypothecated assets 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.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 19.03.2026.

¶34

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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 02.03.2026.

¶37

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶38

Presiding Officer,

¶39

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Sukhdev Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Sukhdev Singh 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

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Gurnam Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Beant Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sitar Mohammad

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Abhi Apparels and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Chandu Ram Nand Lal and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Veer Singh