Allowed

Idbi Bank Limited v. Satyaveer Jain

DRT3 Jan 2026TA/1546/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application for recovery of dues, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the claim after the defendants were dismissed ex-parte. The court directed payment of the principal amount with interest and Sale of hypothecated/Mortgaged assets for realization.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 23,52,883.91 plus interest and allow recovery from sale of hypothecated stock and mortgaged property.

Idbi Bank Limited versus Satyaveer Jain — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.1546 of 2022

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 1546 of 2022

¶5

IDBI Bank Ltd.

¶6

B-29, East Jyoti Nagar Main Loni Road, Shandara Delhi-110093

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1.^{Sh. Satyaveer Jain s/o Sh. Salek Chand Jain} Proprietor of M/s Sanmati Traders R/o D-1/494, Gali No.2, Ashok Nagar LIG Flats, Delhi-110093

¶10

Also at: Sh. Satyaveer Jain s/o Sh. Salek Chand Jain C-7/105, Yamuna Vihar belhi-110053

¶11

Also at: Sh. Satyaveer Jain s/o Sh. Salek Chand Jain V-549, Gali No.18, Vijay Park Maujpur, Delhi-110053

¶12

2.^{Mrs. Sushma Jain w/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Jain} V-549, Gali no.18, Vijay Park, Defendants - Maujpur, Delhi-110053

¶13

Present: Shri Jaynath Shah, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Reserve: 16.12.2025

¶15

Date of Pronouncement: 03.01.2026

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 12.07.2019 before DRT-III Delhi & then transferred to ORT-I Delhi under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to

¶18

¶19

T.A. No.1546 of 2022

¶20

banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of Rs.23,52,883.91 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Three and Paisa Ninety One only) as on 31.03.2019 along with Oendentelite and future interest @14.65% per annum with monthly rests from 31.03.2019 till the date of realization and costs.

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility for Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs only) as Working Capital Facility on 05.09.2014 @12.50% interest per annum against hypothecation of stock, book debts and Movable assets etc. which was renewed on 29.09.2017 @12.65% floating rate of interest per annum. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor for the loan facility sanctioned in favour of defendant no.1 by the applicant bank.

¶22

That in order to avail the loan facility, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Demand Promissory Note, Continuing Security Letter, D.P. Note Delivery Letter, Hypothecation-cum-Loan Agreement, Common Guarantee towards applicant bank. The defendant no.2 executed Declaration & Undertaking, Common Guarantee Deed and Mortgage deed on 08.09.2014, 15.03.2016 and 29.09.2017.

¶23

1. In order to secure the loan facility, defendants created Mortgage of property being Entire First Floor of Plot no.289, 6Iock C-4, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-110053 with the applicant bank on 08.09.2014 by executing Mortgage Deed towards applicant Dank.

¶24

¶25

T.A. No.1546 of 2022

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite several requests. The applicant bank issued notice dated 15.05.2019 to adjust the outstanding dues but defendants neglected the notice. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery Of their dues.

¶27

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings and none appeared on behalf of defendants. As per order dated 09.10.2025, defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets has been filed on behalf of the defendants.

¶28

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Sh. Navneet Kumar Verma authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents Delegation of Power, Sanction letters, D.P. Note, Continuing Security Letter, D.P. Note Delivery Letter, Hypothecation cum Loan Agreement, Common Guarantee deed, Undertaking, Mortgage deed, Guarantee deed, Recall Notice, Statement of Account, Certificate u/s 2A(b) Of Banker's Books Evidence Act as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/16.

¶29

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶30

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant

¶31

¶32

T.A. No.1546 of 2022

¶33

bank and applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶34

In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶35

ORDER

¶36

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within 30 days, a sum of Rs.23,52,883.91 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Three and paisa Ninety One Only) along with pendentelite and future interest @12% p.a. with monthly rests from 01.04.2019 failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated stock and Mortgaged property being Entire first floor Plot no.289, Block C-4, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-110053. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and iMmovable assets of the defendant.

¶37

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent tO the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶38

(ill) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 02.03.2026.

¶39

(1V) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶40

11D-o4 (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶41

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 03.01.2026

¶42

Idbi Bank Limited v. Satyaveer Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Limited v. Satyaveer Jain

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

Smt Mala Tulshiram Rathod versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mr Nripendra Chandra Mohanta

Minikumari Santhamma Vikraman Nair versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd.

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Indu Kishan

Icici Bank Limited versus Subodh Kumar

Union Bank of India versus M/S Bawa Appliances P Ltd.