Allowed

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

DRT11 Feb 2026OA/93/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited for recovery of Rs.62.52 lacs from three respondents who failed to repay a KCC loan. The respondent defendants were absent and proceeded against ex-parte. The court granted interest at 8% per annum instead of the claimed 12.45%. Order uploaded on official site.

What did the court decide?

Declaration for recovery of Rs.62,51,781.44 jointly and severally with interest at 8% p.a.; recovery certificate issued.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 93/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.01.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.02.2026

¶6

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Regulations Act, 1949 Having its Head Office at 27BKC, C27, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 and its Branch Office at Kotak Mahindra Bank, 49, JK Tower, Mall Road, Amritsar-143001, through its Authorized Representative Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Harbans Singh S/o of Sh. Tara Singh, H. No. 214, Village Dasuwal, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran-143416.

¶10

Sh. Jaswinder Singh S/o of Sh. Harbans Singh, H. No. 214, Village Dasuwal, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran-143416.

¶11

Sh. Rajbir Singh S/o of Sh. Sukhdev Singh, S/o Sukhdev Singh H. No. 4, Part No.1, Village Valtoha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn

¶12

Taran-143416.

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

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

¶16

Defendants already ex parte vide order dated 29.07.2025

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

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.62,51,781.44 (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs Fifty One Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty One and Paise Forty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Senior Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to

¶19

2 OA.93/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS SINGH AND OTHERS

¶20

institute the Original Application vide Resolution dated 31.08.2023 which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant KCC Limit of Rs.48.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 01.03.2012. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶22

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit Rs.48.00 Lacs vide Credit Arrangement Letter dated 16.03.2012, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶23

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land Measuring 160Kanal-11Marla Situated at Village Dasuwal, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 1761 dated 26.03.2012, along with its translation, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶24

Documents Executed: RBI Sanction Scheme of ING Vysya Bank Amalgamation with Kotak Mahindra Bank dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement, Guarantee Bond all dated 27.03.2012, which are Annexure A4 to A5 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.11.2024 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; 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.62,51,781.44 which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices 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 notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.07.2025.

¶27

3 OA.93/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS SINGH AND OTHERS

¶28

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

¶29

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶30

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 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 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.62,51,781.44 (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs Fifty One Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty 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.

¶31

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.45%p.a. with 2%p.a. penal interest from 23.11.2024 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 hypothecated assets/mortgaged 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

¶33

4 OA.93/2025 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED VS. HARBANS SINGH AND OTHERS

¶34

OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶35

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.62,51,781.44 (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs Fifty One Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty One and Paise Forty Four Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan accounts 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 hypothecated assets/mortgaged properties 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.

¶36

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 25.02.2026. 15. 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: 11.02.2026. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harbans 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Another

Canara Bank versus Sh. Vishal Soni And Another

Canara Bank versus M/S Teria Machinery Store and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Raj Deepak Fruit Company and Others

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Vijay Kumar and Another

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Mandhar Medical Agency and Others