Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals

INDIAN BANK vs S K ENTERPRISES AND ORS on 2 November 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

**Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi

4<sup>th</sup> Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi**

**Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma**

**T.A. No. 183 of 2022**

Indian Bank

(e-Allahabad Bank)

10174, Gurudwara Road

Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005

Applicant

**Versus**

1. S.K. Enterprises

Through its proprietor

Mr. Saleem Khan s/o Mohammad Harun Khan

D-16, Gali No.4, D Block

Kabir Nagar, Delhi-110094

Also at:

S.K. Enterprises

18/21, Ground Floor

Old Rajinder Nagar. New Delhi-110060

2. Ms. Deepa Batra w/o Sh.H.S. Batra

B-59, B- Block, New Rajinder Nagar

New Delhi - 110060

Defendants

Present: Shri Umang Bansal, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Reserve: 29.09.2026

Date of Pronouncement: 02.11.2026

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

**FINAL ORDER**

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 25.01.2019 before DRT-III Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a Sd - sum of Rs.2,84,30,701/- (Rupees Two core Eighty Four lacs Thirty thousand Seven hundred One only) as on 23.01.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @Contractual rate on footing of compound interest from 24.01.2019 till the date of realization and costs.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor Shri Saleem Khan vide its loan application dated 17.09.2014 along with relevant documents engaged in manufacturing of auto spare parts , the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit (Hyp.) facility of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One crore only) @12.75% interest per annum with monthly rests on 17.10.2014 against hypothecation of stocks/book debts/ other movable assets and mortgage of property bearing no.12/43, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi consisting ground, first and second floor with roof right admeasuring 88 sq. yards owned by defendant no.2. On the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor, the applicant bank sanction additional facility of PC/FBD for Rs.1,00,00,000/- @12.25% interest per annum on 24.02.2015 to be repaid by proceeds of collection of foreign bills against same security. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor for the credit facilities sanctioned by applicant bank in favour of defendant no.1.

2. In order to avail both the credit facilities, the defendants submitted loan applications and executed Acknowledgement of Sanction Letter, General Letter of Hypothecation, Demand Promissory Note, Personal Guarantee by defendant no.2, Consent Clause, Letter of Mortgage, Affidavit of Mortgagor, Recital, Declaration by Guarantor-Mortgagor on Affidavit and sd-

Supplemental Letter of Mortgage in favour of applicant bank on 18.10.2024 and 24.02.2015.

3. That in order to secure the credit facilities, the defendants created equitable mortgage of property bearing no.12/43, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi consisting of Ground, First and Second Floor with roof right admeasuring 88 sq. yards on 18.10.2014 by depositing title deeds of property and letter of mortgage confirming deposit of title deeds and hypothecation of stocks, movable assets and book debts in favour of the applicant bank.

4. It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availment of both the credit facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite several reminders to pay the outstanding dues. The applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 27.12.2017 and issued demand notice u/s 13(2) dated 27.12.2017 for Rs.2,49,66,705/- as on 27.12.2017 along with further interest to the defendants to liquidate the dues duly acknowledged by the defendant no.1 vide compromise/settlement letter dated 17.07.2018.

5. The applicant Bank had issued Possession Notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on 07.03.2018 for possession of mortgaged property, however, during visit, a third party namely Smt.Anita Gupta was in possession of property claiming her ownership over the property on the basis of Sale Certificate dated 23.01.2018 purportedly issued by the Central Bank of India, that the property had been mortgaged by defendant No. 2 as security towards discharge of liability of Rs.1,12,00,000/-.

scd-

6. The applicant Bank further lodged a criminal complaint with the Police Station, Karol Bagh, Delhi alleging therein that the defendants had submitted forged and fabricated documents for availing the credit facilities.

7. 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 29.09.2026, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have failed to file written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets.

8. In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by filing the copies of the documents such as Power of Attorney, Loan application, Application cum Appraisal form, Sanction Letter, Acknowledgement of Sanction, General Letter of Hypothecation, DP Note, Personal Guarantee by defendant no.2, Consent Clause, Letter of Mortgage, Declaration by Guarantor-Mortgagor, Affidavit of defendant no.2, Recital, Renewal Sanction Letter, Supplemental Letter of Mortgage, Demand Notice u/s 13(2), Compromise Settlement Letter, Complaint, Statement of Accounts with Certificate under Section 2A of Bankers Books of Evidence Act and Statement of account of uncharged interest marked as Page no.4 to 129.

9. 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.

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.

Sd/-

11. In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, , jointly or severally, sum of Rs.2,84,30,701/- (Rupees Two core Eighty Four lacs Thirty thousand Seven hundred One only) as on 23.01.2019 together with pendentelite and future interest @12.75% interest from 23.01.2019 till the date of realization and costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated stocks, movable assets and book debts along with mortgaged property bearing no.12/43, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi admeasuring 88 sq. yards. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

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

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 04.01.2027.

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

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

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 02.11.2026

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead