Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. Vivek Choudhary

DRT7 Feb 2026TA/2918/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an original application by Karur Vysya Bank for recovery of dues. Proceeding ex parte due to defendant absence, the court directed payment of principal, interest, and costs with a lien on mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.68,39,550.81 with interest and costs within 30 days; recovery certificate issued; enforcement lien on mortgaged property declared.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Vivek Choudhary — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.2918 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.2918 of 2022

¶5

Karur Vysya Bank 1/776, Nicholson Road Kashmere gate, Delhi-110006

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Vivek Choudhary s/o Sh. Gajender Choudhary R/o Q1/261, South City-2, Near Park Hospital Sector-49, South City-II, Gurgaon Haryana-122018

¶9

M/s JSS Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Through its Directors

¶10

Sh. Pratosh Kumar Sharma Office: 1/10243, Gali No.1 Gorakh Park, Shandara, Delhi-32

¶11

Also at:

¶12

M/s JSS Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Corp.Office: GH-02/C, Sector-1 Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 Defendants

¶13

Present: Sh.Sarthak Bhatia, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶14

Date of Reserve: 16.01.2026

¶15

Date of Pronouncement: 07.02.2026

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 09.05.2022 before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.68,39,550.81 (Rupees Sixty Eight Lacs Thirty Nine

¶18

T.A. No.2918 of 2022

¶19

Thousand Five Hundred Fifty and paisa Eighty One only) as on 03.08.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @7.20% per annum and penal interest @3% per annum with monthly rests from 04.08.2021 till the date of realization and costs.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant no.1 vide loan application dated 12.07.2019, the applicant bank sanctioned housing loan for Rs.70,95,000/(Rupees Seventy Lacs Ninety Five Thousand only) on 30.07.2019 @8.90% interest per annum under Digital Home Loan 777 to be repayable in 300 EMIs of Rs.59,056/- for purchase of under construction residential apartment bearing no. Flat no.T-3/C-612, Block-6, Tower T-3, Type C, Sector 1, Group Housing NCR Monarch, Plot no.GH-02/C, Sector-1, Block no.7, Gautam Budhnagar, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh to be developed and constructed by defendant no.2 as per Builder Buyer Agreement dated 09.07.2019. The defendant no.1 agreed to pay penal interest @3% per annum in case of default or delay in repayment of interest / installment.

¶21

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted application form for housing loan and executed Home Loan Agreement, Agreement cum Undertaking, Letter of Undertaking, Document Execution Certificate and Tripartite Agreement on 22.07.2019 and 30.07.2019 with the applicant bank.

¶22

That as per Tripartite Agreement between defendants and applicant bank, the defendant no.2 undertook to refund all the amount disbursed to the defendant no.1 by the applicant bank in case of default.

¶23

¶24

T.A. No.2918 of 2022

¶25

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 created mortgaged the Apartment no.T-3/C612, Block-6, Tower T-3, Type C, Sector-1, Group Housing NCR Monarch, Plot no.GH-02/C, Sector-1, Block no.7, Gautam Budh Nagar, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh-121002 as per Agreement cum Undertaking dated 30.07.2019 with the applicant bank.

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing the loan facility, the defendant no.1 failed to comply with the terms and conditions of loan agreement. The applicant bank issued demand letters dated 05.12.2020 and 26.03.2021 to the defendants but defendants neglected the same. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 23.03.2021 as per RBI guidelines but defendants did not come forward to clear the dues. 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. As per order dated 23.04.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the tribunal and failed to file written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets.

¶28

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Manish Khandelwal, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney, Builder Buyer Agreement, Sanction Letter, Housing Loan Agreement, Agreement cum Undertaking to create Mortgage Deed, Letter of Undertaking, Document Execution Certificate, Tripartite Agreement, Demand Letter, Statement of Account duly

¶29

T.A. No.2918 of 2022

¶30

certified under Banker's Evidence Act marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/10 (Colly).

¶31

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.

¶32

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶33

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶34

ORDER

¶35

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.68,39,550.81 (Rupees Sixty Eight Lacs Thirty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Fifty and Paisa Eighty One only) as on 03.08.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.20% per annum with monthly rests and costs from 04.08.2021 till the date of realization and costs from the sale of mortgaged property being Apartment no.T-3/C-612, Block6, Tower T-3, Type C, Sector-1 Group Housing NCR Monarch, Plot no.GH-02/C, Sector-1, Block no.7, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh-121002. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶36

¶37

T.A. No.2918 of 2022

¶38

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

¶39

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 09.04.2026.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 07.02.2026

Karur Vysya Bank v. Vivek Choudhary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. Vivek Choudhary

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

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Sri.Shaik Tajrul Ameen

State Bank of India versus M/S R & P Marketing Rep by Its Proprietor Smt. Poonam Prajapati

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Saket Jalan

Hdfc Bank versus Leen Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M/s Darbar Restaurant

Punjab National Bank versus Murari