Allowed

Uco Bank v. Sh. Mohinder Singh

DRT6 Dec 2023OA/2128/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application filed under Section 19 RDBFI Act for recovery of over Rs.46 Lacs. The court sanctioned the claimed principal and directed recovery with interest at 10% p.a., permitting enforcement via mortgage sale or attachment of assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs.46,62,031.00 plus 10% p.a. simple interest. Enforcement via sale of mortgaged property or attachment of personal assets allowed.

Uco Bank versus Sh. Mohinder Singh — Specific Performance | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.2128/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.11.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.12.2023

¶6

UCO Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 10, B.T.M., Sarni, Kolkata and one of its branches known at Haibowal Kalan Branch, Ludhiana through its Constituted Attorney, Sh. Rashpal Singh, Branch Manager, UCO Bank, Haibowal Kalan Branch, Ludhiana, who is also the principal officer of the plaintiff bank

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Teja Singh, R/o Village Churpur, Haibowal Kalan, District Ludhiana

¶10

Sh. Varinder Singh S/o Sh. Mohinder Singh, R/o Village Churpur, Haibowal Kalan, District Ludhiana

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Ashok Kumar, Advocate proxy for Sh. Varun Verma, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.46,62,031.00 (Rupees Forty Six Lacs Sixty Two Thousand Thirty One only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rashpal Singh, Branch Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Circular dated 20.07.2012, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 14.05.2012, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant Bank sanctioned the aggregate KCC Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 28.06.2012, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Later the KCC limit was renewed for Rs.27.00 Lacs vide Format for renewal of credit card limit in the 2^nd and 3^rd year dated 21.05.2014, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶19

Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 13K-8½M situated at Village Chuharpur, H.B. No.104, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing vasika No.4747 dated 15.06.2012 along with its translation, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Documents executed: - D.P. note, Letter of waiver, Letter of continuity - D.P. note, Letter of waiver, Letter of continuity and Hypothecation cum Agreement for agricultural loans all dated 28.06.2012, which are Annexures A5 to A8 to this OA; Acknowledgement of debt dated 15.10.2019, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Certificate copy of Statements of accounts, which are Annexures A11 to A13 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.46,62,031.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 30.10.2023.

¶20

Documents executed: - D.P. note, Letter of waiver, Letter of continuity - D.P. note, Letter of waiver, Letter of continuity and Hypothecation cum Agreement for agricultural loans all dated 28.06.2012, which are Annexures A5 to A8 to this OA; Acknowledgement of debt dated 15.10.2019, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Certificate copy of Statements of accounts, which are Annexures A11 to A13 to this OA.

¶21

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rashpal Singh, Branch Manager, UCO Bank has been filed.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A13 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The applicant bank opened two KCC accounts and later one FITL account was also opened as per the guidelines issued by Reserve Bank of India during Covid-19. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.46,62,031.00 (Rupees Forty Six Lacs Sixty Two Thousand Thirty One only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶25

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50%p.a. with half yearly rests from 01.11.2022 till the realization.

¶26

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it

¶27

¶28

just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @10.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.46,62,031.00 (Rupees Forty Six Lacs Sixty Two Thousand Thirty One only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @10.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶29

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 14.12.2023. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶30

Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal. Dated: 06.12.2023 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Uco Bank v. Sh. Mohinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Sh. Mohinder 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

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Hemkunt Auto Fuels

Union Bank of India versus M/s Shri Waheguru Industries

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Shubham Enterprises

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Rajwant Singh And Another

Punjab National Bank, versus Sh. Rakesh Kumar

Indian Bank versus Sh. Buta Singh