Allowed

Indusind Bank Limited v. Narinder Singh and Others

DRT1 Jul 2023OA/2135/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a loan default by defendants, directing payment of the principal amount plus 10% simple interest effective from the application date, and issued a recovery certificate for enforcement.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 20,78,873.41 with 10% simple interest w.e.f. 09.11.2022; recovery certificate issued subject to appearance before Recovery Officer.

Indusind Bank Limited versus Narinder Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 2135 of 2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.11.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 1^st DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

Indusind Bank Limited , a body corporate and a scheduled Bank constituted under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, with its Registered Office at 2401, Gen. Thimmayya Road, (Cantonment) Pune411001 and amongst others its Branch at Nagla-Megha, Tehsil and District, Karnal, Haryana, through its Manager and Attorney Holder, Sh. Deepak Goyal S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar, presently posted at Zonal Office, Agri Buisness Division, S.C.O 62, Top Floor, Sector 32-C, Chandigarh

¶6

.......Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Narinder Singh S/o Sh. Duli Chand R/o House No. 900, V.P.O Kalron Tehsil and District, Karnal, Haryana-132114

¶9

Sh. Dipender Singh Rana S/o Sh. Narender Singh R/o House No. 900, V.P.O Kalron, Tehsil and District, Karnal, Haryana-132114

¶10

......Defendants

¶11

Argued by: Sh. Deepak Goyal, Manager (GPA holder) for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 26.06.2023

¶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 Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity) , against the defendants for recovery of

¶14

OA/2135/2022 INDUSIND BANK Vs SH. NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 2

¶15

Rs.20,78,873.41/(Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Three and Forty One Paisa Only) . The OA has been filed through Sh. Deepak Goyal, Manager of the applicant bank, stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 01.09.2022, 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. 22.50 Lacs and term loan of Rs. 2 Lacs vide loan application dated 01.07.2016, 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. 17.58 Lacs and term loan of Rs. 3.42 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 18.08.2016, Annexure-A3 (copy) as per terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants. 4. In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed various loan and security documents, i.e. demand promissory note dated 29.09.2016, Annexure-A4 (copy), demand promissory note delivery-cum-waiver letter dated 29.09.2016, Annexure-A5 (copy), hypothecation agreement dated 28.09.2016, Annexure-A6 (copy). Defendant No. 2 executed guarantee deed dated 29.09.2016, Annexure-A7 (copy). 5. The aforesaid loans were further secured by creation of mortgage by defendant No. 1 in respect of agricultural land measuring 91 Kanals 11 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of Kalron, Tehsil Gharaunda, District Karnal, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5.9 of the Original

¶18

OA/2135/2022 INDUSIND BANK Vs SH. NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 3

¶19

Application. Declaration dated 29.09.2016 under Section 4(1) of the Haryana Agriculture Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1973, along with letter dated 29.09.2016 to the SubRegistrar, Gharaunda, for entry/mutation of mortgaged property, Annexure-A8 (colly) (copy).

¶20

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 declared as NPA on 01.05.2022. The defendants executed acknowledgement of debt letter dated 10.02.2022, Annexure-A9 (copy). The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide notice dated 29.08.2022, AnnexureA10 (copy) along with postal receipts, Annexure-A10 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶21

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts, a sum of Rs.20,78,873.41/-

¶22

(Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Three and Forty One Paisa is recoverable against defendants as per statements of accounts, Annexures-A11 and A13 (copy) certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act and memorandums of interest, Annexures-A12 and A14 (copy).

¶23

Since the defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate. 7. Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants

¶24

OA/2135/2022 INDUSIND BANK Vs SH. NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 4

¶25

despite service, thus, defendants were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 26.06.2023 .

¶26

In support of the contents of Original Application, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Deepak Goyal, Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶27

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

¶28

It was argued Sh. Deepak Goyal, 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 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.20,78,873.41/- (Rupees

¶29

Twenty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy

¶30

Three and Forty One Paisa from the defendants, from the date of filing the present Original Application, till realization 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 @12% per annum plus penal interest @18% per annum in cash credit facility with half yearly rests and @13.50% per annum plus penal interest @18% per annum in term loan facility with half yearly rests. In sanction letter dated 18.08.2016, Annexure-A3 (copy), rates of interest have been

¶32

OA/2135/2022 INDUSIND BANK Vs SH. NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 5

¶33

mentioned @12% in cash credit facility and @13.5% per annum in term loan facility, respectively.

¶34

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. business, quantum of loan, 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 @10% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶35

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.20,78,873.41/(Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Three and Forty One Paisa with current and future simple interest @10% per annum w.e.f. 09.11.2022 , 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 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

¶36

OA/2135/2022 INDUSIND BANK Vs SH. NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS 6

¶37

applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of

¶38

law.

¶39

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶40

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 01.09.2023.

¶41

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.

¶42

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

Indusind Bank Limited v. Narinder Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indusind Bank Limited v. Narinder Singh and Others

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

Uco Bank versus Messers R D Enterprise

State Bank of India versus M S Satyam Shivam Automobiles Pvt. Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Binod Kumar Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Sanjay Pippal

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus M/S M. S. Contractors

Idbi Bank versus Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari