Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Kuldeep Singh

DRT30 Aug 2023OA/2075/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Applicant bank's Original Application filed under Section 19(1) of the RDBFI Act, 1993, to recover loan dues of Rs. 38,49,902 from Defendants who defaulted on sanctioned agricultural loans and mortgages. The Tribunal, however, exercised discretion to grant interest at 8% per annum instead of theclaimed rate. A Recovery Certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 38,49,902 with simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 11.11.2022; Recovery Certificate issued; Liberty to recover from sale of mortgaged property or attachment of personal assets.

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Kuldeep Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 2075 of 2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 11.11.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 30^th DAY OF AUGUST, 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 amongst other places at Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana, through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Assistant Manager (Legal), Regional Office, HDFC Bank Limited, Regional Office, Bank House, Chandigarh, being Power of Attorney holder of the Applicant Bank

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Kuldeep Singh s/o Sh. Tek Chand @ Teka R/o Village Sinand, Tehsil Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana-136027

¶9

Sh. Jagdeep Singh s/o Sh. Tek Chand @ Teka R/o Village Sinand, Tehsil Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana-136027

¶10

Sh. Gurnam Singh s/o Sh. Bhalle Ram R/o Village Sinand, Tehsil Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana-136027

¶11

.…..Defendants

¶12

Argued by: Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Deputy Manager for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 18.02.2023

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

OA/2075/2022 HDFC BANK Vs KULDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER 2 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 Rs.38,49,902/- (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and 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).

¶15

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had approached the applicant bank for grant of cash credit facility of Rs. 20 lacs and term loan facility of Rs. 8.50 lacs vide application for retail agriculture loan dated 20.01.2014, Annexure-A2 (copy). Defendant No. 3 stood as a guarantor for repayment of the loan.

¶16

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid credit facilities to the defendants vide sanction letters dated 28.01.2014, Annexures-A3 and A4 (copy) as per terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants.

¶17

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed various loans and security documents, i.e. demand promissory note dated 05.02.2014, Annexure-A5 (copy), letter of continuity for demand promissory note dated 05.02.2014, Annexure-A6 (copy), agreement for term loan-cum-guarantee-cumhypothecation dated 05.02.2014, Annexure-A7 (copy) and agreement for secured overdraft/cash credit-cum-guarantee-cum-hypothecation dated 05.02.2014, Annexure-A8 (copy).

¶18

OA/2075/2022 HDFC BANK Vs KULDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶19

3 5. The aforesaid loans were further secured by creation of mortgage by defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in respect of agricultural land measuring 56 Kanals situated in the revenue estate of Sinand, Tehsil Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5(v) of the Original Application.

¶20

The documents relating to the mortgage are as under:

¶21

i. Registered mortgaged deed dated 31.01.2014, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶22

ii. Request letter dated 03.02.2014 to the Tehsildar, Kalayat, for entry/mutation of mortgaged property, Annexure-A10 (copy).

¶23

It is further the case of 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 01.04.2019. The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide legal notice dated 29.08.2022 along with its original postal receipts, AnnexureA11 (colly) but to no avail.

¶24

It is further the case of applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts, a sum of Rs.38,49,902/(Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Two Only) is recoverable against defendants as per statement of account certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act, Annexure-A12 (copy).

¶25

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

¶26

OA/2075/2022 HDFC BANK Vs KULDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶27

4 7. Notices of the Original Application were 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 18.02.2023 .

¶28

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

¶29

This Tribunal has heard ex parte arguments advanced by Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Deputy Manager of the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶30

It was argued Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Deputy Manager of the applicant bank 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 comes out 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. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.38,49,902/- (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Two Only) from the defendants, from the date of filing the present Original Application, till realisation of the amount.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed rate of interest @11.25% per annum plus penal interest @2% per annum in both facilities. In

¶32

OA/2075/2022 HDFC BANK Vs KULDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER 5 sanction letters dated 28.01.2014, Annexures-A3 and A4 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @12% per annum with half yearly rests in cash credit facility and @13% per annum with half yearly rests in term loan facility, respectively.

¶33

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. agriculture, 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 realization of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶34

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.38,49,902/- (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Two Only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 11.11.2022 , 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 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

¶35

OA/2075/2022 HDFC BANK Vs KULDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER 6 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 defendants. The applicant bank is at liberty to

¶36

enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 09.10.2023.

¶39

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.

¶40

Announced in the open Tribunal

¶41

(M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Kuldeep Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Kuldeep 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

Bank of Maharashtra versus R.K Trading Co.

Union Bank of India versus Vidhya Telsang Alias Vidhya Pradeepkumar Telsang

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Telsang Motors

Shree Deepak So Bhaskarrao Mudliyar versus Shri Anand Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus Gundepanga Bixam

Bengal Speech and Hearing Pvt. Ltd. versus Icici Bank Limited