Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sahajahan Begum

DRT27 Jan 2026TA/848/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of outstanding dues of approximately Rs. 23.16 lakhs from the borrowers and guarantor, who were absent from the proceedings. The Tribunal directed payment within 30 days and recovery from mortgaged property if unpaid.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 23,16,276.64 with interest and costs within 30 days; recovery from sale of mortgaged MIG Flat in case of shortfall.

Union Bank of India versus Sahajahan Begum — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.848 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. 848 of 2022

¶5

Union Bank of India

¶6

Ground Floor, Ambedkar Bhawan Institutional Area, Sector-16 Rohini, Delhi-110085

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1.^{Ms. Sahajahan Begum} R/o H.No. 138, Ground Floor DDA Flats, Sunlight Colony-2

¶10

Hari Nagar Ashram, New nbDelhi-110014

¶11

Also at:

¶12

MIG Flat no.347-B, Second Floor

¶13

Khasra no.231, Village Kilokri Hari Nagar Ashram, New Delhi-110014

¶14

Mohd. Rasid

¶15

H.No.138, Ground Floor DDA Flats, Sunlight Colony-2 Hari Nagar Ashram, New Delhi-110014

¶16

Also at:

¶17

MIG Flat no.347-B, Second Floor Khasra no.231, Village Kilokri Hari Nagar Ashram, New Delhi-110014

¶18

Mr. Ashraf Ali (Guarantor) R/o H.No.10068, Street No.3 West Gorakh Park, Shandara, Defendants Delhi-110032

¶19

Present: Mr. Ravinder Gupta, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶20

Date of Reserve: 12.01.2026

¶21

Date of Pronouncement: 27.01.2026

T.A. No.848 of 2022

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 23.05.2019 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.23,16,276.64 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Sixteen Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Six and paisa Sixty Four only) as on 30.04.2019 along with pendentelite interest @10.25% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of its realization and costs.

¶26

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant no.1 and 2 vide loan application for housing loan dated 06.10.2014, the applicant bank sanctioned housing loan of Rs.29,80,000/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Thousand only) on 17.10.2014 @10.25% floating rate of interest to be repayable in 240 EMIs of Rs.29,252/- in order to purchase MIG Flat No.347-B, Second Floor (without roof rights), Khasra No.231, Village Kilokari, Hari Nagar Ashram, New Delhi. The defendant no.3 stood as guarantor for the housing loan facility availed by defendantno.1 and 2.

¶27

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 and 2 submitted loan application dated 06.10.2014 and executed Housing Loan Agreement (SD-11) Demand Promissory Note (21-G) and defendant no.3 executed Letter of Guarantee (SD-01) and Letter of Undertaking from Guarantor & Borrowers with the applicant bank on 17.10.2014.

¶28

That in order to secure the housing loan facility, the defendants mortgaged the MIG Flat no.437-B, Second Floor (without roof rights), Khasra no.231, Village Kilokri, Hari Nagar, Ashram, New Delhi-110014 towards applicant banl,

¶29

¶30

T.A. No.848 of 2022

¶31

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and comply with the terms and conditions of loan despite several requests and reminders and defaulted in payment of monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 16.03.2016 and issued legal notice dated 29.03.2016 alongwith personal visits to clear the dues but defendants neglected, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶32

Notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 29.06.2017 was issued to the defendants and notice to take possession u/s 13(4) issued on 18.12.2017 for taking possession on 11.01.2018 but defendants not responded.

¶33

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 08.10.2025, defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶34

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed various documents such as General Power of Attorney of Authorized Officer, Sanction Letter, Housing Loan Agreement, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Guarantee, Letter of Undertakings, NPA Certificate, Certified Statement of Loan account, Demand Notice dated 27.06.2017 alongwith Postal Receipts, Possession Notice and Sale Deed marked from page no.1 to 62.

¶35

¶36

T.A. No.848 of 2022

¶37

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.

¶38

10.^{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.

¶39

11.^{In the light of the above discussions, the Original} Application deserves to be allowed.

¶40

ORDER

¶41

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.23,16,276.64 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Sixteen Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Six and paisa Sixty Four only) along with pendentelite interest @10.25% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till its realization with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged property being MIG Flat no.347-B, Second Floor (without roof rights) Khasra no.231, Village Kilokri, Hari Nagar Ashram, New Delhi-110014. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶42

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

¶43

(III)^{Part;es are directed to appear before Recovery Officer,} DRT I, Delhi on 01.04.2026. � sd -

¶44

¶45

T.A. No.848 of 2022

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 27.01.2026

¶49

Union Bank of India v. Sahajahan Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sahajahan Begum

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

Paramjit Singh versus Union Bank of India

Kiranjeet Kaur versus Uco Bank

Excellon Software Private Limited through Director Vinodkumar Laxminarayan Tambi versus Bank of Maharashtra

Mr Abhishek Anand versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Anup

Bank of India versus Salasar Garments