Delhi District Court
Union Bank Of India vs Kaushal Kumar Singh on 29 October, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SANJEEV KUMAR MALHOTRA
DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)-08:
CENTRAL: TIS HAZARI COURTS:DELHI
CS (COMM.) No. 229/2025
CNR No. DLCT01-001551-2025
Union Bank Of India
Through its Authorised Representative
Karol Bagh Branch, 17/53A WEA,
Karol Bagh, Karol Bagh
Delhi-110005
....Plaintiff
Vs
Kaushal Kumar Singh
S/o Triveni Prasad Singh
WZ 624 B-Block, Naraina Village
Naraina Village,
Delhi-110028
...Defendant
Date of Institution : 25.01.2025
Date of Arguments : 09.10.2025
Date of Judgment : 29.10.2025
JUDGMENT
1. This is a commercial suit for recovery of Rs. 11,08,247.25/- (Rupees Eleven Lacs Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Twenty Five paisa Only) as filed by the plaintiff bank against the defendant.
2. In brief, facts as made out from the plaint are that the plaintiff bank is a body corporate constituted by and under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking), Act, 1970 having its head office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharastra-400021, India and having CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 1 of 7 one of its branch at Union Bank of India, Karol Bagh branch, 17/53A, WEA, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005.
3. It is case of the plaintiff that the Defendant approached the plaintiff bank in or about April 2020 for Purchase of a New Four Wheeler Hyundai Verna under Vehicle Loan Under Union Miles Schemes and considering the said request of defendant and upon execution of necessary documents, Plaintiff Bank sanctioned a Limit of Rs. 10,98,000/-(Rupees Ten Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Only) on dated 20/11/2020 for Purchase of New Four Wheeler Hyundai Verna 1.5 CRDI MT SX Polar White Colour, Registration number DL8CBA8471, Chasis number MALC841FLLM248933, Engine Number D4FALM109486.
4. It is further case of the plaintiff that the tenure of Loan was 60 months and applicable rate of interest was 7.5% (Floating) and the terms and conditions of the Sanction of the said loan facility were duly accepted by defendant. The said loan amount was credited in the Loan account in 030730100010554 under the terms and conditions of the Sanction Letter & Loan Agreement. The said loan was secured by way Hypothecation of New Four Hyundai Verna 1.5 CRDI. It is further submitted that at the request of defendant, the Bank through its Branch officer Karol Bagh Branch had lent an advance credit facility vide sanction dated 20/11/2020 and in respect of said facility and also to secure the amount outstanding under the said facility, defendant executed loan and security documents.
5. It is further case of the plaintiff that defendant, failed to adhere to the financial discipline required as stipulated in the terms of sanction and agreements and the defendant allowed the CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 2 of 7 financial facility to become grossly overdue and the loan was declared NPA on dated 29/05/2022. It is submitted that the plaintiff bank issued Notice under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (3) of SARFAESI Act on dated 08.01.2024. It is further submitted that the amount due with interest up as on 09/08/2024 is Rs. 11,08,247.25/-, which includes Rs. 8,58,970.10/- towards principal and Rs. 2,49,277.15/- towards interest.
6. It is averred that plaintiff also initiated the mandatory pre- institution mediation as per Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 before Central District Legal Services Authority on 24.01.2024, however the defendant failed to participate in the mediation proceedings, therefore, a Non Starter Report was issued on 02.07.2024.
7. The plaintiff bank prays that a decree may be passed in its favour and against the defendant for a total sum of Rs. 11,08,247.25/- alongwith costs, pendente lite and future interest @12.25% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization of the loan amount. Hence, the present suit.
8. From the perusal of the record, it is revealed that the summons of the suit were served upon the defendant through publication on 23.05.2025, however, the defendant neither put his appearance nor filed the written statement within the stipulated period and accordingly, his defence was struck off vide order dated 02.07.2025.
9. Ld. Predecessor vide order dated 02.07.2025 framed following notional issues:
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree in the sum CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 3 of 7 of Rs. 11,08,247.25/- as prayed for? OPP
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any interest and if so, at what rate, at what amount and for what period? OPP
3. Relief.
10. The plaintiff led its evidence and examined Mrs. Tanya Aggarwal, Branch Manager, who tendered her evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A and relied upon the following documents:
1. Copy of Authorization Letter in favour of AR of the plaintiff bank i.e. Ex. PW1/1.
2. Loan application form i.e. Ex.PW1/2.
3. Sanction letter i.e. Ex. PW1/3.
4. Demand Promissory Note i.e. Ex. PW1/4.
5. Letter of Continuity i.e. Ex. PW1/5.
6. Letter of General Lien i.e. Ex.PW1/6.
7. Letter of undertaking from borrower i.e. Ex. PW1/7.
8. Hypothecation of Vehicle Agreement i.e. Ex. PW1/8.
9. Notice U/s 13 (2) under SARFAESI Act i.e. Ex. PW1/9.
10. Computerized printout of Statement of account i.e. Ex. PW1/10.
11.Certificate of statement of account U/s 63 BSA, 2023 i.e. Ex. PW1/11.
12.Certificate by the Officer/Manager in Charge of computer system U/s 2A (B) of the Bankers Book of Evidence Act, 1891 i.e. Ex. PW1/12.
11. I have heard Sh. Quaisar Ali, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and also gone through the records of the case. I have also perused CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 4 of 7 written submissions as filed on behalf of the plaintiff. None has appeared on behalf of the defendant to advance arguments. My findings on notional issues are as under:
ISSUE NO. 1 & 2:
12. The onus of proving these issues is on the plaintiff. The notional issues as framed by Ld. Predecessor can be considered as a point of determination regarding the claim of the plaintiff in present suit. The evidence led by PW-1 has gone unrebutted and unchallenged and there is nothing on record to disbelieve the same. PW-1 has proved Authorization Letter in favour of AR of the plaintiff bank as Ex. PW1/1, Loan application form as Ex.PW1/2, Sanction letter as Ex. PW1/3, Demand Promissory Note as Ex. PW1/4, Letter of Continuity as Ex. PW1/5, Hypothecation of Vehicle Agreement as Ex. PW1/8 and Statement of account as Ex. PW1/10.
13. The suit is also commercial in nature and as such squarely falls within the purview of section 2 (1) (c) of Commercial Courts Act and plaintiff has also duly complied with mandatory provisions of pre-institution mediation and conciliation as provided under section 12A of Commercial Courts Act.
14. Moreover, this court has the territorial jurisdiction over the present case as the loan documents were executed at Karol Bagh Branch of the plaintiff bank, which area falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. This court has also the pecuniary jurisdiction over the matter since the suit amount claimed by the plaintiff is more than the specified value of Rs.3 lacs of the Commercial Court.
15. As far as the aspect of limitation is concerned, Hon'ble CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 5 of 7 Supreme Court In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022, dated 10.01.2022 held as under:-
"I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-- judicial proceedings."
16. As per Letter of Sanction Ex. PW1/3, the loan was sanctioned on 20.11.2020 and in terms of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Misc. App No. 21 of 2022 (supra), the period from 20.11.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation. The plaintiff has filed the present suit on 25.01.2025 i.e. within the period of limitation.
17. From the documents proved on record by PW-1, it is clear that the defendant approached the plaintiff bank and availed financial assistance by way of Term Loan and after availing the loan, the defendant defaulted in repayment of loan. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled for a decree against the defendant.
18. The agreed rate of interest between the parties as per Letter of Sanction Ex. PW1/3 is 7.5% per annum + 2% penal interest on the overdue installment. PW1 in his affidavit of evidence has also claimed pendente lite and future interest at the contracted rate i.e. 7.5 % per annum + 2% penal interest. Accordingly, it is held that the plaintiff is entitled for interest @ 9.50% per annum on the suit amount from the date of filing of suit till realization. Accordingly, these issues are decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 6 of 7RELIEF:
19. In view my findings on aforementioned issues, it is held that the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.
Rs. 11,08,247.25/- (Rupees Eleven Lacs Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Twenty Five paisa Only) alongwith interest @ 9.50% per annum from the date of filing of suit till realization. Accordingly, the present suit is decreed for a sum of Rs. 11,08,247.25/- (Rupees Eleven Lacs Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Twenty Five paisa Only) alongwith interest @ 9.50% per annum from the date of filing of suit till realization in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. Costs of the suit are also awarded to the plaintiff.
20. Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly.
21. File be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally signed
SANJEEV by SANJEEV
KUMAR
KUMAR MALHOTRA
Announced in the open court MALHOTRA Date: 2025.10.29
15:52:42 +0530
on 29.10.2025
(Sanjeev Kumar Malhotra)
District Judge (Commercial Court)-08,
Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi CS (Comm.) No. 229/2025 Union Bank of India vs. Kaushal Kumar Singh Page 7 of 7