JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED vs BILAL AHMAD KHASHOO on 12 August 2026

ORDER

1. On 19.11.2011, The Jammu and Kashmir bank Ltd. filed the suit for the recovery of Rs.20,65,837/- with interest against Bilal Ahmad Khashoo and others (defendants) in the Court of District Judge, Srinagar. However, vide order dated 27.12.2022, this suit was transferred by the Court of the Additional District Judge (Bank Cases), Srinagar, to DRT-I, Chandigarh.

2. Defendant No.1 is Borrower and defendant Nos. 2 to 6 are the Guarantors. Bank’s case is that on 27.05.1999, it had granted a Cash Credit facility of Rs.1.50 lacs to defendant No.1 for business purpose. On 29.08.2000, the CC facility was enhanced from Rs.1.50 lacs to Rs.4.50 lacs and on 24.02.2001, it was further enhanced to Rs.10 lacs. To secure the CC facility, defendant No.1 had hypothecated stocks (Hypothecation Agreement attached to the plaint as Annexure P22). Defendant Nos.2 to 4 stood as Guarantors for the above Cash Credit facility (vide Guarantee Deeds dated 21.05.1999, 16.08.2000 and 22.02.2001). The Cash Credit facility was chargeable to interest @13% per annum with quarterly rests. On 09.08.1999, Bank had also granted a Demand Loan of Rs.2.50 lacs for purchase of a car. To secure the Demand Loan, defendant No.1 had hypothecated his car (fully detailed in para No.10 of the plaint). Defendant Nos.5 and 6 stood as Guarantors for the above Demand Loan (vide Guarantee Deed dated 09.08.1999). Demand Loan was chargeable to interest @15.81% per annum with quarterly rests. The defendant executed a DP Note on 05.08.2005 acknowledging liability towards the Demand Loan. The defendant executed a DP Note on 23.02.2007 acknowledging liability towards the Cash Credit facility. On 19.11.2011, a sum of Rs.20,65,837/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this suit.

3. On 21.11.2011, the Court of District Judge, Srinagar issued summonses to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 15.12.2012, defendant No.5 was proceeded ex parte; vide order dated 18.05.2013, defendant Nos.2 and 6 were proceeded ex parte and vide order dated 19.04.2014, defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 were proceeded ex parte.

4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Mohammad Muzaffar Mufti, Executive Manager Law, along with the loan and original 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 Cash Credit facility of Rs.10 lacs and a Demand Loan of Rs.2.50 lacs to defendant No.1 and on 19.11.2011, a sum of Rs.20,65,837/- (Rs.16,86,154/- in CC account and Rs.3,79,683/- in Demand Loan) was due.

6. Accordingly, the application of the Bank for the recovery of Rs.20,65,837/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Sixty-Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Thirty-Seven Only) with interest @15.81% per annum with monthly rests from 19.11.2011, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant Nos.1 to 4 would be joint and several for the Cash Credit facility of Rs.10 lacs and the liability of defendant Nos.1, 5 and 6 would be joint and several for the Demand Loan of Rs.2.50 lacs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated stocks and car (Hypothecation Agreements attached to the plaint as Annexure P22 and P29, respectively), 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 15.09.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property 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: 12.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh HARSH