Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Dharminder Singh

DRT14 Jul 2023OA/1594/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of Rs.31,61,876/- from the defendant. The court exercised discretion to grant uniform simple interest at 8% per annum from the date of filing based on the nature of the agricultural loan and pandemic impact.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.31,61,876/- plus simple interest at 8% p.a. from 02.09.2022, enforceable via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Dharminder Singh — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1594/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.09.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 14^th DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

State Bank of India (in which State Bank of Patiala amalgamated), a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India, Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Centre at State Bank Bhawan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sectore-17-B, Chandigarh, including one such Branch at Near Bus Stand, Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, through its Chief Manager, Smt. Poonam Tandon

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Dharminder Singh S/o Sh. Tek Chand R/o VPO Sandhola, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra

¶9

…..Defendant

¶10

Argued by: Sh. Divjot Singh Rekhi, Nodal Officer for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 01.02.2023

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant

¶13

bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendant for recovery of Rs.31,61,876/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Six only) . The OA has been filed through Smt. Poonam Tandon, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide the Gazette Notifications dated 20.03.2017, Annexures-A1 and A2 (copy).

¶14

OA/1594/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. DHARMINDER SINGH

¶15

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per the Original Application are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for grant of KCC limit of Rs.20 lacs vide application Forms dated 12.12.2012 for agricultural credit, Annexure-A3 (copy).

¶16

The applicant bank sanctioned the aforesaid credit facility to the defendant vide sanction letter dated 18.12.2012, Annexure-A4 (copy) as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶17

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendant executed various loan and security documents, i.e. hypothecation agreement dated 18.12.2012, Annexure-A5 (copy), demand promissory note dated 18.12.2012, Annexure-A6 (copy) and D.P. note delivery-cum-continuity letter dated 18.12.2012,

¶18

Annexure-A7 (copy).

¶19

The aforesaid loan facility was further secured by creation of registered mortgage by the defendant in respect of agricultural land measuring 56 Kanals situated in revenue estate of Sandhola, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, fully described in para No. 5 (v) of the Original Application. Registered mortgage deed No.4083 dated 17.12.2012, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶20

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendant but he failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan account became irregular and it was declared NPA on 01.09.2020. Defendant executed revival letters dated 29.11.2015, 12.03.2017 and 10.02.2020, Annexures-A9 to 11 (copy). The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated

¶21

OA/1594/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. DHARMINDER SINGH

¶22

13.06.2017 along with its postal receipt, Annexures-A12 and A13 (copy), but to no avail.

¶23

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.31,61,876/(Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Six only) is recoverable against the defendant as per statement of account, certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, Annexure-A14 (copy).

¶24

Since the defendant did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.

¶25

Notice of the Original Application was duly served upon the defendant, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendant despite service, thus, the defendant was proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 01.02.2023.

¶26

In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Smt. Poonam Tandon, Chief Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶27

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by Sh. Divjot Singh Rekhi, Nodal Officer and gone through the record carefully.

¶28

It was argued by Sh. Divjot Singh Rekhi, Nodal Officer that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendant for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A14 , it is clear that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for

¶29

OA/1594/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. DHARMINDER SINGH

¶30

availing of the loan facility which was granted to him after he had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendant 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.31,61,876/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Six only) from the defendant.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank has claimed in relief clause, interest @10.25% per annum with half yearly rests. In sanction letter dated 18.12.2012, Annexure-A4 (copy), the rate of interests had been mentioned @14.25% per annum.

¶32

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 properties, purpose of loan, i.e. agriculture, present conditions of economy based on agriculture and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, while exercising 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 final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶33

OA/1594/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. DHARMINDER SINGH

¶34

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.31,61,876/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Six only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum , w.e.f. 02.09.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated properties of the defendant 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 remain unsatisfied, applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets/property of the defendant. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 13.09.2023

¶37

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.

¶38

Announced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Dharminder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Dharminder Singh

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

Shafi Adattil versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Idbi Bank versus M/s Maa Vindhyavashini Industries and others

Uco Bank versus M/s V1 Veriety Mall and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S R R Enterprises and Others

Ashoutosh Prabhakar versus LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

Idbi Bank versus Mohan Kumar Rai and Ors.