Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Karamvir Singh and Another

DRT18 May 2023OA/1635/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 37,97,052 plus interest against two repsonsds. The claim related to an agricultural loan and mortgage that became NPA. The bank was granted 8% simple interest compensating for market conditions.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued directing payment of Rs. 37,97,052 with 8% simple interest from 12.09.2022 until realisation.

Hdfc Bank versus Karamvir Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1635 of 2022

¶3

Date of Institution: 12.09.2022

¶4

DATED THE 18th DAY of MAY, 2023

¶5

H.D.F.C. Bank Limited , a Banking Company, carrying on the Banking business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai–400013, whereas Branch at Hansi, District Hisar, Haryana, through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Assistant Manager (Legal), Regional Office, HDFC Bank Limited, Regional Office, Plot No. 28, Industrial Area, Phase–I, Chandigarh (U.T.), being Power of Attorney holder of the Bank

¶6

......Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Karamvir Singh S/o Sh. Dalip Singh @Dalipa R/o House No. 26, Village Sindhar, Tehsil Hansi, District Hisar, Haryana–125033

¶9

Sh. Subhash S/o Sh. Badewa R/o House No. 27, Ward No. 22, Village Sindhar, Tehsil Hansi, District Hisar, Haryana–125033

¶10

....Defendants

¶11

Argued by: Sh. Saurabh Bhardwaj counsel for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 02.02.2023

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and

¶14

OA/1635/2022 HDFC BANK LTD. Vs KARAMVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER 2

¶15

Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity) , against defendants for recovery of Rs.37,97,052/(Rupees Thirty Seven lacs Ninety Seven Thousand and Fifty Two only) . The OA has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Assistant Manager (Legal) of the applicant bank, stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 16.12.2020, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶16

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that defendant No. 1 had approached the applicant bank for grant of cash credit facility of Rs. 22.95 lacs and term loan facility of Rs. 6.60 lacs vide loan application dated 02.02.2015, Annexure-A2 (copy). Defendant No. 2 stood as a guarantor for repayment of the loan.

¶17

The applicant bank sanctioned cash credit facility of Rs. 22.85 lacs and term loan facility Rs. 6.60 lacs vide sanction letters dated 10.02.2015, Annexures-A3 and A4 (copy) as per terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants.

¶18

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed various loan and security documents, i.e. demand promissory note dated 02.03.2015, Annexure-A5 (copy), letter dated 02.03.2015 regarding continuity of demand promissory note Annexure-A6 (copy), term loan-cum-guarantee-cum-hypothecation agreement dated 02.03.2015, Annexure-A7 (copy) and secured overdraft/cash credit-cum-guarantee-cum-hypothecation agreement dated 02.03.2015, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶19

The aforesaid loans were further secured by creation of mortgage by defendant No. 1 in respect of agricultural land measuring 80 Kanals

¶20

OA/1635/2022 HDFC BANK LTD. Vs KARAMVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER 3

¶21

situated in the revenue estate of Sindhar, Tehsil Hansi, District Hisar, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5(v) of the Original Application.

¶22

The documents relating to mortgage are as under:

¶23

i. Registered Mortgage Deed dated 02.03.2015, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶24

ii. Request letter dated 02.03.2015 to the Tehsildar, Hansi, for entry/mutation of mortgaged property, Annexure-A10 (copy).

¶25

It is further the case of the applicant that the loan facilities were duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan accounts became irregular and those were declared NPA on 06.06.2021. The defendants executed acknowledgment of debt letter dated 20.08.2020 along with declaration by witness, Annexure-A11 (colly) (copy). The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 01.08.2022 along with original postal receipt, Annexure-A12 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶26

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts a sum of Rs.37,97,052/(Rupees Thirty Seven lacs Ninety Seven Thousand and Fifty Two only) is recoverable against defendants as per statements of accounts dated 13.07.2022, Annexures-A13 and A14 (copy) certified under Banker’s Book Evidence Act.

¶27

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

¶28

OA/1635/2022 HDFC BANK LTD. Vs KARAMVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER 4

¶29

Notice of the Original Application was duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants despite service, thus, defendants were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 02.02.2023 .

¶30

In support of the contents of Original Application, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Assistant Manager (Legal) of the applicant bank was filed.

¶31

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

¶32

It was argued by the learned 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 A14 , it comes out that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them. It is further cleared that the defendants had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.37,97,052/- (Rupees Thirty Seven lacs Ninety Seven Thousand and Fifty Two only) from the defendants, from the date of filing the present Original Application, till realisation of the amount.

¶33

In so far as pendent lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause, has claimed rate of interest @12% per annum plus 2% per annum penal interest in both loan accounts. In sanction letters dated 10.02.2015, Annexures-A3 and A4 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @12% in cash credit facility with

¶34

OA/1635/2022 HDFC BANK LTD. Vs KARAMVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER 5

¶35

half yearly rests and @16% in term loan facility with half yearly rests, respectively.

¶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 mortgage 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 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.

¶37

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with cost declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum Rs.37,97,052/(Rupees Thirty Seven lacs Ninety Seven Thousand and Fifty Two only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 12.09.2022 , 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 properties of defendants in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 or otherwise. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of

¶38

OA/1635/2022 HDFC BANK LTD. Vs KARAMVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER 6

¶39

personal assets of the defendants. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶40

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 25.07.2023.

¶42

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.

¶43

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

Hdfc Bank v. Karamvir Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Karamvir 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

Union Bank of India versus M/S .Sri Krishna Food Mill

M/S Rajindera Auto Services versus Indusind Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Sumer Sons Autotech Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of India versus M/S Sahil Industries

Hdfc Bank versus Hawa Singh Nd Others

Indian Overseas Bank versus Santosh Kumar