Allowed

Uco Bank v. Shri Asim Kumar Mighlani and Anr.

DRT25 Feb 2026TA/1230/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 1.68 crore against defendants for loan default, directing payment and attachment of mortgaged and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Direct defendants to pay Rs.1,68,40,494.66 with interest @10.20% p.a. within 30 days; recover shortfall via sale of mortgaged and personal assets.

Uco Bank versus Shri Asim Kumar Mighlani and Anr. — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

Before SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI, Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

TA No.123O of 2024

¶3

UCO BANK Vs SHRT ASIM KUMAR MIGLANI & ANR

¶4

Reserved on =^29.01..2026

¶5

Pronounced on : 25.O2.2O26

¶6

UCO Bank Vs.

¶7

-^{Applicant bank}

¶8

ShriAsim Kumar Miglani

¶9

Smt. Babita Miglani

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Present: Shri LS. Chauhan, Counsel appears for applicant bank. None for defendants.

¶12

FINAL OR,DER

¶13

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 19.05.2017 through Shri S.P. Singh Kalsi, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,68,40,494.66 together with cost, charges and pendentellite and future interest @ ll.70o/o p.a. compounded with monthly interest from date of filing of this O.A. till the realization in full.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of the defendants the applicant bank sanctioned, on t7.07.2014, a Term Loan Facility of Rs.1,62,97,000/-. In order to avail the said loan facility the defendants have executed various loaning documents dated 21.07.2014. In order to secure due repayment of the above said facility, the defendants created equitable mortgage in respect of the immoveable property bearing plot no.52, Block D,

S-l^,

I I I I I

! i I I I I I I li I

TANO. 1230of2024 2

Sector 41, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida 201301, UP in favour of the applicant bank.

¶20

It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facility, but failed to maintain^the financial discipline and failed to repay the due^amounts. The applicant bank requested the defendants^to regularize the loan account by visib^{and letters, but there} was no response from the defendants,^{hence the account} was classified as NPA on 31.07.2016.^{Therefore,the} applicant bank served a legal^{demand notice dated} 02.11.2016 to the defendants,^{demanding the amount} due as on that date,^{but failed to recover the same.Thus,} the^present O.A. is^{preferredby the applicantbank to} recover its dues.

¶21

On notice by this^{Tribunal, defendants put} apirearance through^{counsel and Rled the written} statement. However, defendant^{failed to file the evidence.}

¶22

The applicant bank^{filed its evidence by way of the} affidavit, AWU of Shri^{S.P. Singh Kalsi, Chief Manager of} the applicant bank as^{paper no.3 to paper no.42-}

¶23

The documentary^{evidence filedby applicant bankhave} gone unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, the^{case of} the applicant bank stands^{fully establishedagainst the} defendants with respect to non^{payment of EMI/} outstanding amount.

¶24

After^perusing the records, this^{Tribunalis of the} view that the applicant bank has^{provedits case beyond}

I i i

TANO. 1230of2024 3

reasonable doubb. The documents^{and evidence filed} by the applicant bank not^{rebufted by the defendantsby} not placing any evidence and^{there is no questionof} disbelieving the evidence^{filed by the applicantbank} based upon the written/printed^documents.

¶29

In the light of the above^{discussions, the present T'A'} deserves to be^{allowed againstdefendant no.1 & 2'}

¶30

ORDER

¶31

I hereby allow^{this O.A. of the ApplicantBank and} direct the defendant^{nos. 1 & 2 to pay jointlyand} severally to the^{applicant bank within30 days from today,} a sum of^{Rs.1,68,40,494.66along with cost, expenses} and interest @^{10.20olo from the date of filing of this} O.A. which^{has becomeT.A. till the date of realization'}

¶32

In case of^{failure to deposit the above amount} within the stipulated^{period, the same shall be recovered} from the sale of^{the mortgagedpropefi bearing plot} no.52, Block^{D, Sector 41, Gautam Budh Nagar,Noida} 201301, UP. In^{case of short fall, the same shall be} recovered from the^{sale of personal movable and} immovable assets^{of the defendant no. 1 & 2'}

¶33

Recovery^{Certificate be issuedforthwithand be sent} to Recovery^{Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi'}

¶34

The registry^{of this Tribunalis hereby directed to} issue free copy of^{the order and send the same to both} the parties. 01

¶35

TANO. 1230of2024 4 5) Pafties are directed to appear before the Ld. Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on 27.04.2026. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶36

File be consigned to records.

¶37

Date : 25.02.2026

¶38

? €.\ (susHrl ruNnn RASToGT) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶39

This judgement has been signed, dated and pronounced in open court.

¶40

'.',. Date : 25.02.2026 (susHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶41

Uco Bank v. Shri Asim Kumar Mighlani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Shri Asim Kumar Mighlani and Anr.

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