Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Smt. Lalita Saini

DRT20 Sept 2023OA/1664/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application against a female borrower who defaulted on an agricultural KCC loan, ordering recovery of the principal with moderated interest and liberty to sell collateral assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 33,13,109 with 7% simple interest from filing date; liberty to recover through sale of mortgaged or personal property.

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Lalita Saini — Specific Performance | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1664/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 15.09.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 20^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶5

Punjab National Bank , a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head Offices at Plot No. 4, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi, Pin-110075 and Branches all over India including one at Dosarka, District Ambala, Haryana (presently account is being handled by Circle Sastra Centre Kurukshetra, Haryana), as per arrangement of the bank for handling NPA accounts, through its Constituted Attorney/Manager, Sh. Baldev Raj

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Lalita Saini w/o Sh. Dalip Saini r/o House No. 374-A, East Bhatia Nagar, Yamunanagar, District Yamunanagar (Haryana)-135001

¶9

....Defendant

¶10

Argued by: Sh. Karan Dev Ray proxy counsel for Sh. Bhushan Bhatia Advocate for the applicant bank Defendant ex parte vide order dated 28.04.2023

¶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 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendant for recovery of Rs.33,13,109/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand

¶13

OA/1664/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS SMT. LALITA SAINI 2

¶14

One Hundred and Nine Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Baldev Raj, Constituted Attorney/Manager of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 04.09.2003, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶15

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for grant of KCC facility of Rs. 20,00,000/- vide loan application dated 10.05.2015, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶16

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facility to the defendant vide sanction letter dated 15.06.2015, Annexure-A3 (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 hypothecation agreement dated 25.06.2015, Annexure-A4 (copy).

¶18

The aforesaid limit was further secured by creation of equitable mortgage by defendant in respect of agricultural land measuring 20 Kanals 08 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of Tangail, Sub-Tehsil Barara, District Ambala, Haryana.

¶19

The documents related to mortgage are as under:

¶20

i. Registered mortgage deed dated 04.02.2013, Annexure-A5 (copy).

¶21

ii. Registered supplementary/additional mortgage deed dated 22.06.2015, Annexure-A5/1 (copy).

¶22

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendant but she failed to

¶23

OA/1664/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS SMT. LALITA SAINI 3

¶24

maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank leading to the loan account becoming irregular and it being classified as NPA on 19.05.2022. The defendant executed balance and security confirmation letters dated 03.01.2018 and 23.12.2020, AnnexuresA7 and A7/1 (copy). The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 06.04.2022, Annexure-A6 (copy), but to no avail.

¶25

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.33,13,109/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred and Nine Only) is recoverable against the defendant as per statement of account duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶26

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

¶27

Notice of the Original Application was duly served upon the defendant, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendant, thus, the defendant was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 28.04.2023 . 8. In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Baldev Raj, Authorised Officer/Chief Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶28

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

¶29

OA/1664/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS SMT. LALITA SAINI 4

¶30

It was argued by learned proxy counsel for the applicant bank 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 A8 , it is clear that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. It is further clear that the defendant 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.33,13,109/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred and Nine Only) from the defendant.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank has claimed rate of interest @10.90% per annum plus penal interest @2% per annum. In hypothecation agreement dated 25.06.2015, Annexure-A4 (copy), the rate of interest has been mentioned @12% 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, purpose of loan, i.e. agricultural, present conditions of economy based on agriculture, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears and defendant being a female, while

¶33

OA/1664/2022 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS SMT. LALITA SAINI 5

¶34

exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @7% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶35

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs holding that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.33,13,109/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lac Thirteen Thousand One Hundred and Nine Only) with current and future simple interest @7% per annum w.e.f. 15.09.2022 , 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 property 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, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. However, the applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 16.10.2023.

¶38

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

¶39

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

Punjab National Bank v. Smt. Lalita Saini

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Smt. Lalita Saini

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Pung Enterprise

Canara Bank versus Sri Pranjal Boruah

Indian Bank versus M/s S. Footware and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Ram Singh

Union Bank of India versus Maya Saha and Anr.

Icici Bank Limited versus Ramashree Baliraj Yadav