Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
BANK OF BARODA vs M/S DREAM LAND ELCTRONICS on 3 February 2026
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER
TA No: 261 of 2023
Date of Institution: 28.10.2020
Date of Decision: 03.02.2026
Bank of Baroda having a branch at Court Road, Amira Kadal, Srinagar, Kashmir.
……..Applicant
Vs.
1. M/s Dream Land Elctronics through its proprietor namely Mustafa Kamal s/o Mohi Udin Kama r/o S.D. Colony, Batmalloo, Srinagar, Kashmir.
2. Mustafa Kamal s/o Mohi Udin Kama r/o S.D. Colony, Batmalloo, Srinagar, Kashmir.
3. Mohd. Ismail Khan s/o Wazir Ahmad Khan r/o Gulshion Colony, Allochy Bagh, Srinagar, Kashmir.
……….Defendants
Advocates
Ms. Rupinder Kaur proxy counsel for Sh. R.K. Jindal, Counsel for the applicant bank.
None for defendants.
TA for the Recovery of Rs.21,84,554/- with interest @13.50% per annum with monthly rests from 28.10.2020.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
1. On 28.10.2020, Bank of Baroda filed the suit for the recovery of Rs.21,84,554/- with interest against M/s Dream Land Electronics and others (defendants) in the Civil Court, Srinagar. However, vide order dated 21.02.2023, this suit was transferred by the Court of Additional District Judge, (Bank Cases), Srinagar, to DRT-I, Chandigarh.
2. Bank’s case is that on 19.01.2005, it had granted a loan of Rs.5.00Lacs to Defendant no.1 through its proprietor Defendant no.2 in the form of C.C. Limit for business purpose. To secure the loan,
Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No. V of the application). Defendant no.3 stood as the guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @13.50% per annum with monthly rests. The defendants had acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 19.12.2020 and 27.01.2016. On 31.01.2020, a sum of Rs.21,84,554/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, the application.
3. The, Civil Court, sent summonses to the defendants by registered post, which was duly served. After the transfer of the suit, summonses were sent to defendants yet they did not put in appearance before this Tribunal. Hence, they were proceeded ex parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Prashant B. Vahulraje, Authorised Officer, along with the loan and security documents.
5. 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 the loan of Rs.5.00Lacs and on 31.07.2020, a sum of Rs.21,84,554/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the case of the bank for the recovery of Rs.21,84,554/- (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Eighty Four Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Four Only) with interest @13.50% per annum with monthly rests from 28.10.2020, 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 mortgaged land fully detailed in para No. V of the suit as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 11.03.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage land as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.
10. 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: 03.02.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh