Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Manoj Powder Coating and Others

DRT7 Apr 2026TA/3/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed a transfer application filed by HDFC Bank against a proprietorship firm and guarantors for recovery of dues. The defendants did not appear, and the court ordered repayment with interest at 8% per annum instead of the claimed rate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants declared liable to pay Rs. 1,22,54,247.41 jointly and severally with simple interest at 8% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Manoj Powder Coating… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

TRANSFER APPLICATION NO.3/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.02.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 07.04.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, a Banking Company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400013 and one of its Branch at HDFC Bank Limited, Samrala Road, Ludhiana, Punjab through its duly Constituted Attorney Mr. Madhur Sharma, working as Deputy Vice President, currently posted at HDFC Bank Ltd., B-21-14570, 5^th Floor, GT Road, Dholewal Chowk, Adjoining Gulzar Motors, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141008

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/S Manoj Powder Coating, a Proprietorship Firm through its Proprietor Mr. Manoj Kumar having its Place of Business at B- 29/164/3, Street no. 1, Giaspura Road, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶10

Mr. Manoj Kumar, S/o Mr. Ghuran Mahto, Proprietor M/s Manoj Powder Coating, having its Place of Business at B-29/164/3, Street no. 1, Giaspura Road, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶11

2^nd Address: R/o House no. 351/2, Street no. 6, Gagan Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141014

¶12

Mrs. Manju Devi, W/o Mr. Manoj Kumar, R/o House no. 351/2, Street no. 6, Gagan Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141014

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Mr. Sumit Batra, Advocate for applicant (through VC) None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 02.04.2026)

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Transfer Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,22,54,247.41 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Two Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Two Hundred Forty

¶18

2 TA/3/2026

¶19

HDFC BANK VS. M/S MANOJ POWDER COATING AND OTHERS

¶20

Seven and Paise Forty One Only). The Transfer Application has been filed through Mr. Madhur Sharma, Deputy Vice President of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Transfer Application vide Board Resolution dated 21.08.2025 , which is Annexure A1 to this TA.

¶21

The brief facts of the TA are that defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of CC Limits of Rs. 35.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 04.11.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this TA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for enhancement of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs.15.00 Lacs. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 again approached the applicant for renewal of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 again approached the applicant for renewal of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs. Thereafter, defendant no.1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 again approached the applicant for renewal of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs.

¶22

The applicant sanctioned the CC Limits of Rs. 35.00 Lacs and Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 04.02.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this TA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. The applicant sanctioned the enhancement of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 10.05.2023, which is Annexure A11 to this TA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the renewal of CC Limits of Rs.95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 30.12.2023, which is Annexure A18 to this TA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the renewal of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 21.03.2024, which is Annexure A19 to this TA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the renewal of CC Limits of Rs. 95.00 Lacs and Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 28.01.2025, which is Annexure A21 to this TA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶23

3 TA/3/2026 HDFC BANK VS. M/S MANOJ POWDER COATING AND OTHERS

¶24

Defendant no. 2 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 60 Sq. Yards situated at Giaspura, Tehsil and District Ludhiana vide Registered Sale Deed no. 12804 along with its translation dated 16.01.2012, which is Annexure A8 to this TA; Memorandum recording Past Transaction dated 04.02.2023, which is Annexure A9 to this TA and Valuation Report dated 28.01.2023 which is Annexure A10 to this TA. Documents executed: Master Facility Agreement, Letter of Hypothecation, both dated 07.02.2023, which are Annexure A4 and A5 to this TA; Power of Attorney, Letter of Continuing Guarantee, both dated 04.02.2023, which are Annexure A6 and A7 to this TA; DP Note, Letter of Continuing Security and Letter of Continuing Guarantee, all dated 09.05.2023, which are Annexure A12, A13 and A17 to this TA; Supplementary Agreement, Supplementary Letter of Hypothecation and Key Fact Statement, all dated 10.05.2023, which are Annexure A14 to A16 to this TA; Addendum dated 30.09.2024, which is Annexure A20 to this TA; Recall Notice dated 07.01.2026, which is Annexure A22 to this TA; Account Statement with Interest Calculation and certificate, which are Annexure A23 and A24 to this TA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 1,22,54,247.41 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. 6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 02.04.2026. 7. In support of the TA, affidavit of Mr. Madhur Sharma, Deputy Vice president, HDFC Bank Limited, h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel (through VC) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone

¶25

4 TA/3/2026

¶26

HDFC BANK VS. M/S MANOJ POWDER COATING AND OTHERS

¶27

unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A24 to this TA, it is proved that the defendant no. 1 through its Proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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 loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 1,22,54,247.41 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Two Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Paise Forty One Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Transfer Application till realization of the accounts.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @18%p.a.from 01.01.2026 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 @08.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the TA 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.1,22,54,247.41 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Two Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Paise Forty One Only) jointly and severally with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of TA till

¶31

¶32

TA/3/2026 HDFC BANK VS. M/S MANOJ POWDER COATING AND OTHERS

¶33

the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated assets/mortgaged property of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the 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.

¶34

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 27.04.2026. 15. Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant bank 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: 07.04.2026

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Manoj Powder Coating and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. M/S Manoj Powder Coating 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

Axis Bank Limited versus M/S Bestway Health and Future Private Limited and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. (earlier known as Uti Bank Ltd.) versus Sh. Shamsher Singh

Axis Bank Limited versus Sh. Daljit Singh through His Legal Heirs and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Chhapola Bus Service and Tour Travels and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Taranjit Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Baljinder Singh