JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED vs AB. HAMEED MAIK on 11 August 2026

ORDER

1. On 25.08.2020, Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited, filed the suit for the recovery of ₹24,69,202.23p with interest against Ab. Hameed Malik and others (defendants) in the Court of Additional District Judge,

Handwara. However, vide order dated 21.02.2023, Additional District Judge, Handwara, transferred this suit to DRT-I, Chandigarh.

2. Defendant No.1 is proprietor of M/s Momin Traders Limited, defendant Nos.2 and 3 are the guarantors, defendant Nos.4 and 5 are the legal heirs of the deceased-guarantor Gh. Qadir Malik. Bank’s case is that on 27.05.2008, it had granted a loan of ₹3.00 Lacs to defendant no.1 in the form of C.C Limit for business purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had hypothecated his assets (fully detailed in para No.3 of the application). Defendant No.3 and Gh. Qadir Malik (since deceased now survived through his legal heirs defendant Nos.4 and 5) stood as guarantors vide Deed of Guarantee dated 27.05.2008. 2A. On 02.05.2009, at the request of the defendants, bank enhanced the existing limit from ₹3.00 Lacs to ₹7.00 Lacs. To secure the enhanced limit, Defendant No.1 had hypothecated his assets (fully detailed in para No.4 of the application). Defendant No.2 and Gh. Qadir Malik (since deceased) stood as guarantors vide Deed of Guarantee dated 10.06.2009. The loan was chargeable to interest @14.50% per annum with monthly rests. On 30.04.2020, a sum of ₹24,69,202.23p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, the suit.

3. The Court of Additional District Judge sent summonses to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. After transfer of this suit, summonses were sent to the defendants which were duly served. However, they did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 14.02.2025, they were proceeded ex parte.

4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Bashir Ahmad Bhat, Assistant Vice President, along with the original 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 ₹7.00 Lacs and on 30.04.2020, a sum of ₹24,69,202.23p was due.

6. Accordingly, the case of the bank for the recovery of ₹24,69,202.23p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Two and Paise Twenty Three Only) with interest @14.50% per annum with monthly rests from 25.08.2020, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant Nos.4 and 5 being the legal heirs of Gh. Qadir Malik would be limited to the extent of the property inherited by them from him. The liability of defendant Nos.1 to 3 would be would be joint and several. However, the liability of Defendant no.3 would be to the extent of amount guaranteed by him. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of the hypothecated assets fully detailed in para No.3 and 4 of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants accordingly.

7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 14.09.2026.

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: 11.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA