Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harbhajan Singh Alias Bhajan Singh and Others

DRT10 Apr 2026OA/948/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank for recovery of Rs. 1.04 crore from five respondents who failed to repay a KCC loan secured by mortgaged properties. The court granted recovery with interest fixed at 08% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 1,04,54,737.82 jointly and severally with simple interest at 08% per annum from the date of filing.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Harbhajan Singh Alias… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.948/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.08.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 10.04.2026

¶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, C-27, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 and the successor to ING Vysya 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 representative Sh. Munish Sharma . .

¶7

… …..Applicant Versus

¶8

1. Sh. Harbhajan Singh @ Sh. Bhajan Singh S/o Sh. Rohit Singh, House No.127, Village Jakhepal Hambalwas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab-148028

¶9

2. Sh. Rohi Singh @ Sh. Rohit Singh S/o Sh. Lal Singh, House No. 127, Village Jakhepal Hambalwas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab-148028

¶10

3. Sh. Lakhvir Singh S/o Sh. Rohi Singh, H.No.127, Village Jakhepal, Hambalwas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab-148028

¶11

4. Smt. Harbans Kaur W/o Sh. Rohi Singh, House No. 127, Village Jakhepal Hambalwas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab148028

¶12

5. Sh. Lakhwinder Singh S/o Sh. Bahadar Singh, Village Jakhepal Hambalwas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab-148028

¶13

.……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Satwinder Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Sameer Mahajan, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) None for Defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 27.03.2026)

¶16

2 OA/948/2023 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. VS SH.HARBHAJAN SINGH ALIAS BHAJAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶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.1,04,54,737.82 (Rupees One Crore Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Seven & Paise Eighty Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharma, Authorized Representative of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the Defendant No. 1 to 4 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 88.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 13.08.2013, Defendant No. 5 stood as Guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 75.00 Lacs vide Credit Arrangement Letter and ancillary documents dated 19.09.2013, which is Annexure A3 (Colly) to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendant No. 1 to 4 mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. Total Agricultural Land measuring 150K-05M, in which, 127K-1M situated at Village Hambalwas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab and 23K-4M situated at Village Daula Singh Wala, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab, vide Mortgage Deed bearing Vasika No. 2237 dated 05.11.2013 along with its English translation which is Annexure A4 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed: Notification regarding Amalgamation of ING Vysya Bank with Kotak Mahindra Bank dated 01.04.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated 29.06.2022 & 04.07.2022 with Postal Receipts, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Statement of Account with certificate, which is Annexure A6 to this ОА. 5. 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.1,04,54,737.82, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount,

¶22

3 OA/948/2023 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. VS SH.HARBHAJAN SINGH ALIAS BHAJAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶23

therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants. On 18.03.2024, The OA was dismissed for default of applicant. Thereafter, vide order dated 22.01.2026 passed in MA No. 154/2024, the OA was restored on its original number. Again, Notices were issued to defendants regarding restoration of the OA but no one appeared on behalf on defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 27.03.2026

¶25

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

¶26

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶27

It was argued by proxy 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 A6 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 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.1,04,54,737.82 (Rupees One Crore Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Seven & Paise Eighty Two 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.

¶28

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant has claimed interest @12% p.a. plus @2.00% p.a. penal interest with half yearly rests from 24.06.2022 to till the realization.

¶29

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

¶30

4 OA/948/2023 KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. VS SH.HARBHAJAN SINGH ALIAS BHAJAN SINGH AND OTHERS

¶31

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 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.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.1,04,54,737.82 (Rupees One Crore Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Seven & Paise Eighty Two 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 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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 30.04.2026

¶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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated 10.04.2026

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶36

Presiding Officer,

¶37

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harbhajan Singh Alias Bhajan Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Sh. Harbhajan Singh Alias Bhajan 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Gurdeep Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Satpal Singh and Another

Canara Bank versus Sh. Inderjit Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus M/S Virasat E Punjab and Anr.

Canara Bank versus M/S Inderdeep Singh and Sons and Another

Union Bank of India versus M/S v. B . Exports and Another