JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED vs BASHIR AHMAD LONE on 8 July 2026

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-1, CILANDIGARH FA No. 290 of 2023 FIle Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited Versus Bashir Ahmad Lone Dated: 08.07.2026 Item No. 162 Present : Mr.Gaurav Thakur, Counsel for the Applicant Bank. None for the defendant. On 30.03.2012. The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited (Bank) had filed the suit for the recovery of Rs}. 75,00,532/- against Bashir Ahmad Lone (.defendant). in the court of Principal District Judge. Kulgam. Kashmir.

2. The averments in the plaint are that the defendant was posted as an officer in the Nihama Branch of the Bank from 24.01.2009 to 12.04.2011 when he was dismissed from the service. The defendant breacheZhe trust and caused wrongful loss to the Bank. The defendant, in fact, misappropriated the money to the tune of Rs. 75,00,532/-. Accordingly, the Bank filed the present suit for the recovery of Rs. 75,00,532/- against the defendant.

3. Yide order dated 04.07.2023, Principal District Judge, Kulgam. transferred this suit from Kulgam to this Tribunal. The order passed by Principal District Judge, Kulgam, states that vide notification. No. S.O. 4145(E), dated 10.09.2021, this case can be tried only by the DRT. Accordingly, this suit was transferred to this Tribunal.

4. However. a perusal of the plaint would show that this suit was not filed by the Bank to recover any loan. In fact, as per the averments of the plaint, the Bank had filed this suit against the defendant, who was its employee, to recover the misappropriated amount by the defendant.

5. Section 19 of The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. 1993 states that where a person or a financial institution has to recover any debt from any person, it may make an application to the Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction etc.

6. Section 2(g) of The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act.

states that 'debt’ means any liability (inclusive of interest) which is claimed as due from any person by a bank or a financial institutioll or by a consortium od banks or financial institutions during the course of any business activity „.d„t,k,„ by th, b,„k ,, th, n„,„,i,I i„,titution .r the consortium under

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH any law for the assigned. or whether payable under a decree or order of anY civil court etc. t

7. In view of the above provisions. this Tribunal has the jurisdiction to adjudicate only those cases. wherein the bank has advanced any money to somebody who fails to repay the same. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court also in Bank of India versus Vijay Ramniktat Kapadia A.I.R. 1997 Guj . 75 has held that fraud committed by any employee of the bank cannot or should not be construed a 'debt’. Further, misappropriation of the amount of the bank by its employee and recovery thereof by way of the suit can never be construed as a debt

8. In view of this, I am of the considered view that it is only the civil court ' which has the jurisdiction to try this suit and not this Tribunal. Accordingly. the file of this case is sent back to Principal District Judge. Kulgam for proceeding in the matter as per law.

9. Bank is directed to appear before the Principal District JFdge, Kulgam, on 10.08.2026. Pronounced in open court Dated: 08.07.2026 M anoj V DRT:I.–ih;„digM1 + l