The Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application to recover a debt of approx Rs. 32 lakhs from defendant borrowers and guarantors. The court granted a 9% annual interest rate and issued a recovery certificate.
Recovery certificate issued; Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 32,26,713.88 with 9% simple interest.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1744/2022
DATE OF INSTITUTION: 14.09.2022
DATE OF DECISION: 14th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
HDFC Bank Limited , having its registered office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel-(West), Mumbai -400013, also at Plot No. 28, HDFC Bank House, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Chandigarh, through its Authorised Representative, Samandeep Kaur Sekhon
…..Applicant
Versus
....Defendants
Argued by: Ms Dipti Toni proxy counsel for Sh. Gagandeep Toni, Advocate for the applicant bank Defendant No. 1 ex parte vide order dated 24.08.2023 Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 ex parte vide order dated 06.02.2023
FINAL ORDER
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 defendants for recovery of
OA/1744/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS NITESH KRISHAN NAND AND OTHERS 2
Rs.32,26,713.88/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lac Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Thirteen and Eighty Eight Paisa Only) . It has been filed through Ms Samandeep Kaur Sekhon, Authorised Representative of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Resolution of Board of the Directors dated 16.10.2021, Annexure-A1 (copy).
A4 and A5 (copy), facility-cum-hypotheaction agreement dated 28.01.2021, Annexure-A7 (copy), declaration and undertaking dated 28.01.2021 regarding terms and conditions, Annexure-A8 (copy) and undertaking regarding terms and conditions of credit facility under CVGECL, Annexure-A9 (copy).
OA/1744/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS NITESH KRISHAN NAND AND OTHERS 3
financial discipline of the applicant bank leading to the loan accounts becoming irregular and those being classified as NPA on 03.06.2022. The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 18.08.2022, Annexure-A10 (copy) and postal receipts dated 23.08.2022, Annexures-A11 to A13 (copy), but to no avail.
It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts, a sum of Rs.32,26,713.88/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lac Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Thirteen and Eighty Eight Paisa Only) , is recoverable against the defendants as per statements of accounts, duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexures-A14 to A16 (colly) (copy).
Since the defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate. 6. Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants, thus, defendant No.1 was proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 24.08.2023 and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 06.02.2023 .
OA/1744/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS NITESH KRISHAN NAND AND OTHERS 4
amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A16 , it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them. It is further clear that the 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.32,26,713.88/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lac Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Thirteen and Eighty Eight Paisa Only) from the defendants.
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. purchase of commercial vehicles , 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 @9% per annum from the
OA/1744/2022 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS NITESH KRISHAN NAND AND OTHERS 5
date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.
Pronounced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the defendants are liable to repay the outstanding loan amount sought by the applicant bank.
What rate of interest should be granted on the recoverable sum.
Whether the applicants are entitled to a Recovery Certificate against the defendants.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
HDFC Bank Limited
M.M. DHONCHAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
