Allowed

Sarv Haryana Gramin Bank v. Jaspal Singh and Another

DRT19 May 2023OA/1489/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 21.29 lakhs advanced to the defendants via cash credit. The bank proved the loan agreement, mortgage, and NPA status. The court granted recovery with 8% simple interest from filing date and authorized execution against mortgaged or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 21,29,241.24 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date; liberty to recover via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Sarv Haryana Gramin Bank versus Jaspal Singh and Another — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1489/2022 DATE OF INSTITUTION: 17.08.2022

¶3

DATE OF DECISION: 19^th DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶4

Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank , a body corporate having perpetual succession, constituted under the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976, carrying on Banking business and having its Head Office at Plot No. 1, Sector-3, Rohtak, Haryana-124001, one of its Branches amongst other places is known as Branch Arnauli, Sub-Tehsil Chhachhrouli, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamunanagar, through Sh. Naveen Wadhwa, Authorized Officer and General Attorney

¶5

....Applicant Bank

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sh. Jaspal Singh S/o Sh. Amarjit Singh R/o Village Salempur-Bangar, Sub-Tehsil Chhachhroali, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamunanager, Haryana

¶8

Sh. Amarjit Singh S/o Sh. Jorawar Singh R/o Village Salempur-Bangar, Sub-Tehsil Chhachhroali, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamunanager, Haryana

¶9

…...Defendants

¶10

Argued by: Sh. Sanjay Sagar proxy counsel for Sh. Lovkesh Machhal counsel for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 23.01.2023

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity) against the defendants for recovery of Rs.21,29,241.24/- (Rupees Twenty One lacs Twenty Nine

¶13

OA/1489/2022 SARVA HARYANA GRAMIN BANK Vs JASPAL AND ANOTHER

¶14

¶15

Thousand Two Hundred Forty One and Twenty Four Paisa Only) .

¶16

It has been filed through Sh . Naveen Wadhwa, Branch Manager of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 18.08.2018, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶17

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for grant of cash credit facility of Rs. 14 lacs vide loan application 14.10.2015, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶18

The applicant bank sanctioned aforementioned credit facility to the defendants vide sanction letter dated 14.10.2015, Annexure-A3 (copy) as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendants executed hypothecation agreement dated 20.10.2015, Annexure-A4 (copy) and undertaking dated 20.10.2015 regarding terms and conditions, Annexure-A5 (copy).

¶20

The aforesaid loan was further secured by creation of mortgage by the defendants in respect of agricultural land measuring 16 Kanals 2 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of Mirpur, Sub-Tehsil Chhachhroali, District Yamnunanagar, Haryana, fully detailed in para No.5.9 of the Original Application.

¶21

The documents relating to mortgage are as under:

¶22

i. Declaration dated 20.10.2015 regarding ownership of land, Annexure-A6 (copy)

¶23

ii. Affidavits dated 13.10.2015 and 20.10.2015 regarding mortgaged property, Annexure-A7 (colly) (copy).

¶24

OA/1489/2022 SARVA HARYANA GRAMIN BANK Vs JASPAL AND ANOTHER

¶25

¶26

iii. Registered mortgage deed dated 19.10.2015, Annexure-A8 (copy). iv. Request letter dated 19.10.2015 to the Tehsildar, Chhachhrauli, for entry/mutation of mortgaged property, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶27

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan account became irregular and it was declared as NPA on 31.12.2021. The defendants executed balance and security confirmation letters dated 02.05.2018, 27.01.2021 and 09.03.2022, Annexure-A10 (colly) (copy). The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide recall notices dated 14.07.2020, 18.08.2021 and 15.04.2022, Annexure-A11 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶28

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.21,29,241.24/- (Rupees Twenty One lacs Twenty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty One and Twenty Four Paisa Only) is recoverable against the defendants as per statement of account, Annexure-A12 (copy), duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act.

¶29

Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants, thus, the defendants were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 23.01.2023 .

¶30

In support of the contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Naveen Wadhwa, Branch Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶31

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by the learned proxy counsel and gone through the record carefully.

¶32

OA/1489/2022 SARVA HARYANA GRAMIN BANK Vs JASPAL AND ANOTHER

¶33

¶34

It was argued by the learned proxy counsel that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendants for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A12 , it is clear that defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them. It is further clear that defendants had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.21,29,241.24/- (Rupees Twenty One lacs Twenty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty One and Twenty Four Paisa Only) from the defendants.

¶35

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank has claimed, rate of interest @11.50% per annum plus @2% per annum penal interest. In sanction letter dated 14.10.2015, Annexure-A3 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @13.25% per annum.

¶36

This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogatives of mercy and magnanimity are the brightest jewels in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including the Pandemic Covid-19 affecting businesses, nature of the mortgaged property, purpose of loan, i.e. agricultural, present conditions of economy based on agriculture, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, while exercising

¶37

OA/1489/2022 SARVA HARYANA GRAMIN BANK Vs JASPAL AND ANOTHER

¶38

¶39

the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶40

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of

¶41

Rs.21,29,241.24/- (Rupees Twenty One lacs Twenty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty One and Twenty Four Paisa Only)

¶42

with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 17.08.2022, till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joint as well as several. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property of the defendants in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 or otherwise. If the dues of the bank still

¶43

remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶44

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶45

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 26.07.2023.

¶46

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendants through registered/speed post. This order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶47

Announced in the open Tribunal

¶48

(M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer

¶49

DRT-2, Chandigarh

Sarv Haryana Gramin Bank v. Jaspal Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarv Haryana Gramin Bank v. Jaspal Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uco Bank versus B Subba Reddy

State Bank of India versus Awadh Kishore

Smt Sharada Bai M versus Mahila Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Satyawan and Ors.

Hdfc Bank versus Jai Parkash and Others

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus M/S Anshu Brick Field