Allowed

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Sumit Ornament House

DRT25 Aug 2026TA/46/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs.3.13 crore with interest, finding that the bank proved the advance of loans and existence of security/mortgage, directing joint and several liability and issue of recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.3,13,05,045.35 with interest @16.75% p.a. from 12.09.2015 allowed; recovery certificate issued; liability joint and several.

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Sumit… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

TA No: 46/2024 Date of Institution: 12.09.2015 Date of Decision: 25.08.2026
The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd., B/u New University Campus, Jammu. ...Applicant Vs.
1. M/s Sumit Ornament House, 15, Jullaka Mohalla, Jammu: Through its Proprietor, Sh. Sumit Handa.
2. Sh. Sumit Handa S/o Sh. Parbhat Kumar Handa R/o H. No. 15, Jullaka Mohalla, Jammu
3. Sh. Parbhat Kumar Handa S/o Late Sh. Shadi Lal Handa R/o H. No. 14, Jullaka Mohalla, Jammu
4. Sh. Sonu Alias Kapil S/o Sh. Parbhat Kumar Handa R/o H.No. 14, Jullaka Mohalla, Jammu
5. Smt. Veena Rani W/o Sh. Parbhat Kumar Handa R/o H.No. 14, Jullaka Mohalla, Jammu
6. Surjeet Singh S/o Gurinder Singh R/o H.No.911/ EP, Mohalla Jullaka, Jammu
7. Sh. Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Sanjhi Ram Sharma R/o Nonath, Tehsil Hiranagar District Kathua A/p residing at H.No. 1166-F, Street No. 12, Sector-6 Nanak Nagar, Jammu
8. Rohit Bhat S/o Sh. Jai Prakash Bhat C/o Shop No. 15, Mahajan Shoping Complex, Raj Tilak Road, Jammu
9. Lakesh Honda S/o Sh. Prabhat Kumar Handa R/o H. No. 15, Jullaka Mohalla, Jammu ...Defendants Advocates
Sh. Vivek Verma, Counsel for the Applicant Bank.
None for other defendants.
Defendant Nos.7 and 8 –_ex parte_in the Court of Ld. Pr. District Judge,
Jammu. TA for the Recovery of Rs.3,13,05,045.35p with interest
@16.75% per annum with monthly rests from 12.09.2015.

¶4

¶5

ORDER

¶6

On 12.09.2015, Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. filed the suit for the recovery of Rs.3,13,05,045.35p with interest against M/s Sumit Ornament House and others (defendants) in the Court of Learned Principal District Judge, Jammu. However, vide order dated 05.04.2023, this suit was transferred by the Court of Additional District Judge (Commercial Court), Jammu, to DRT-I, Chandigarh.

¶7

Defendant No.1 is a proprietorship concern of defendant No.2. Defendant Nos.3 to 8 are the mortgagors and defendant Nos.3 to 9 stood as guarantors. Bank’s case is that on 20.09.2010, it had granted a Term Loan of Rs.35 lacs and a Cash Credit Limit of Rs.114 lacs to defendant No.1, through its proprietor, for business purpose. On 29.12.2010, Bank enhanced the Term Loan from Rs.35 lacs to Rs.80 lacs and Cash Credit Limit from Rs.114 lacs to Rs.150 lacs. To secure the loan, defendant No.1, through its proprietor, had hypothecated its assets (fully detailed in Para No.11 of the plaint) and defendant Nos.3 to 8 had mortgaged their properties (fully detailed in Para Nos.7 and 8 of the plaint). Defendant Nos.3 to 9 stood as Guarantors for the above facilities vide Guarantee Deed dated 04.01.2011. The Term Loan was chargeable to interest @13.50% per annum with monthly rests and the Cash Credit Limit was chargeable to interest @13.25% per annum with monthly rests. The account of the defendants turned NPA on 31.03.2014. On 31.07.2015, a sum of Rs.3,13,05,045.35p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this suit.

¶8

On 10.03.2016, defendant Nos.3 to 6 and 9 filed their written statement and the same was also adopted by defendant Nos.1 and 2, wherein they alleged that the suit has not been filed by an authorized

¶9

¶10

person. They have alleged that the deed of guarantee is inadmissible and that the defendants were made to sign on blank documents and moreover, the copies of the documents have never been supplied to the defendants. The defendants have denied the case of the Bank.

¶11

Vide order dated 11.01.2017, defendant Nos.7 and 8 were proceeded e x part e in the Court of Learned Principal District Judge, Jammu.

¶12

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Vivek Gupta, Senior Executive Law, along with the loan and original security documents.

¶13

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced a Term Loan of Rs.80 lacs and a Cash Credit Limit of Rs.150 lacs and on 31.07.2015, a sum of Rs.3,13,05,045.35p (Term Loan: Rs.69,10,987/-; Cash Credit Limit: Rs.2,43,94,058.35p) was due.

¶14

Accordingly, the application of the Bank for the recovery of Rs.3,13,05,045.35p (Rupees Three Crores Thirteen Lacs Five Thousand Forty-Five and Paise Thirty-Five Only) with interest @16.75% per annum with monthly rests from 12.09.2015, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated assets and mortgaged properties (fully detailed in Para Nos.7, 8 and 11 of the plaint), as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶15

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶16

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶17

¶18

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 28.09.2026 . 11. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 25.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh HARSH

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Sumit Ornament House

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited v. M/S Sumit Ornament House

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

Rajinder Kaur Chhabra versus Aavas Financiers Limited

Karur Vysya Bank versus Singh Communication

State Bank of India versus Vijay Naithani and Ors.

Federal Bank versus Mr. Sajjan Dhingra

Union Bank of India versus Sh Raman Sharma and Ors.

Hdfc Bank versus Lakhwinder Kaur