Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. Om Prakash Yadav and Anr.

DRT21 Feb 2026TA/2995/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of housing loan dues totaling Rs. 39.77 lakhs. The defendants failed to appear, and the Tribunal passed an ex-parte order directing repayment and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay Rs. 39,77,581.79 plus interest within 30 days and issued a recovery certificate for enforcement against the secured flat and other properties.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Om Prakash Yadav and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.2995 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.2995 of 2022

¶5

arur Vysya Bank -3/10, Prashant Vihar ector-14, Rohini, Delhi-110085 Applicant ersus Sh.Om Prakash Yadav s/o Kundan Yadav /o H.No.78, Parasun, Kashinagar P.-274409 TDI Infracorp (India) Ltd. hrough its directors G Floor, Vandana Building 1, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place ew Delhi-110001 TDI Rea Icon Pvt.Ltd. hrough its directors G Floor, Vandana Building 1, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place ew Delhi-110001 Defendants resent: Sh.Sarthak Bhatia, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Reserve: 28.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 21.02.2026 FINAL ORDER This original application has been filed by the applicant 0 ank on 17.07.2021 through Shri Rishu Jindal, authorized epresentative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of ecovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the

¶6

¶7

T.A. No.2995 of 2022

¶8

0 efendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.39,77,581.79 (Rupees hirty Nine Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighty nd paisa Seventy Nine only) as on 16.04.2020 along with 8 endentelite and future interest @820% per annum plus @3% enal interest with monthly rests from the date of filing of this pplication till the date of realization and costs.

¶9

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of efendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned housing loan .cility for Rs.48,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Eight lacs only) on 5.09.2018 to be repaid in 297 EMI of Rs.40,063/- @8.90% terest with monthly rests in order to purchase under construction Flat No.T-7/0204, 2nd Floor, Lake Side Heights, undli, Sonepat, Haryana as per Apartment Buyers' Agreement • ated 17.12.2018 being developed by defendant no.2 & 3.

¶10

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the efendant No.1 executed Sanction Letter and Housing Loan greement dated 05.09.2018, Tripartite Agreement between efendants with applicant bank on 29.12.2018 and Letter of llotment along with Flat Buyer's Agreement dated 17.12.2018.

¶11

That as per Tripartite Agreement, defendant no.2 & 3 ndertakes that they shall execute proper Conveyance eed/Sale deed / Sub lease deed in favour of the defendant o.1 or such other persons as may be nominated by applicant ank and shall deliver the sale deed directly to the applicant ank. The defendant no.2 & 3 confirmed having marked lien n the flat vide tripartite deed and in case of cancellation / t -rmination of allotment by the developer for any reason shall r -fund all amount disbursed to respondent no.2 and 3 on ehalf of defendant no.1.

¶12

T.A. No.2995 of 2022

¶13

It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing he aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with he terms and conditions and despite several requests letters, mail and reminders the defendants failed to pay the monthly i stallments in time to the applicant bank. the applicant bank I sued several recall notices/letters between 16.09.2019 to 8.12.2020 and declared the account as NPA on 23.03.2021 ut no response, hence the applicant bank has approached this ribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶14

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and espite proper service the defendants have chosen to absent rom the proceedings. As per order dated 26.07.2024, the efendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have failed file written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets.

¶15

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its vidence by way of affidavit of Sh.Rishu Jindal, authorized presentative of the applicant bank who has proved the ocuments such as Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/1, Apartment uyers' Agreement Ex.AW-1/2, Sanction Letter Ex.AW-1/3, ousing Loan Agreement Ex.AW-1/4, Tripartite Agreement x.AW-1/5, Demand Letters Ex.AW-1/6(Colly), Certified tatement of Account under Banker's Book Evidence Act x.AW-1/7(Colly).

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

T.A. No.2995 of 2022

¶20

ank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond easonable doubts.

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the pplicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, sum of Rs.39,77,581.79 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Seventy even Thousand Five Hundred Eighty and paisa Seventy Nine 11) nly) as on 16.04.2020 along with pendentelite and future i terest @11.20% per annum with monthly rests and costs rom the date of filing of this application till the date of ealization and costs. In case of default / shortfall, the same •hall be recovered from the sale of Flat No.T-7/0204,^2ndFloor, ake Side Heights, Kundli, Sonepat, Haryana against whom e defendant no.1 availed the loan facility and other movable nd immovable properties of the defendants.

¶24

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

¶25

II) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, RT I, Delhi on 23.04.2026.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

ictated and pronounced in open court) ated: 21.02.2026

Karur Vysya Bank v. Om Prakash Yadav and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. Om Prakash Yadav and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sakeena versus Cherpalcheri Cooperative Urban Bank

Jainy Jenson versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Abdul Sathar Pookkattil versus South Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/S S.F. Enterprises

Canara Bank versus Reeta Jain

Punjab National Bank versus M/S J.J. India