Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Deepak Chand Singh

DRT27 Jul 2023OA/2272/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank for recovery of a loan amount against the defendants. The court issued a Recovery Certificate, adjusted the claimed interest rate to 9% per annum, and authorized recovery from hypothecated or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 32,30,148.97 with 9% p.a. simple interest from 21.10.2022. Authorization to recover from hypothecated/personal assets.

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Deepak Chand Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 2272 of 2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.10.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 27^th DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

HDFC Bank , is a body incorporated under the name and title as HDFC Bank Limited under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is having its Registered Office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 and one of its Branches at Retail Loan Service Center, HDFC Bank Limited, Kathmandi-Rohtak Road, District Sonepat and one of its Local Controlling Offices at Plot No. 28, HDFC Bank House, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Chandigarh, through its Principal Officer and Constituted Attorney, Ms. Samandeep Kaur Sekhon, Legal Manager, Posted at HDFC Bank, Industrial Area, Phase 1, Chandigarh

¶6

.......Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Deepak Chand Singh S/o Sh. Chand Singh R/o Village Bhainswan-Khurd, District Sonepat, Haryana

¶9

2^nd Address: C/o M/s Yash Selections, Rohtak Road, Gohana District, Sonepat, Haryana

¶10

Sh. Chand Singh S/o Sh. Hira Lal R/o Village Bhainswan-Khurd, District Sonepat, Haryana

¶11

.....Defendants

¶12

Argued by: Ms Aishwarya Chandan, Manager Legal for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order 18.02.2023

¶13

OA/2272/2022 HDFC BANK Vs DEEPAK CHAND AND ANOTHER 2

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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 defendants for recovery of Rs.32,30,148.97/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Thirty Thousand One Hundred Forty Eight and Ninety Seven Paisa Only) . The OA has been filed through Ms. Samandeep Kaur Sekhon, Legal Manager of the applicant bank, stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Board of Resolution dated 16.11.2021, Annexure-P/A (copy).

¶16

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for grant of vehicle loan of Rs. 6,22,862/- and for purchase of commercial equipment of Rs. 26,64,222/- vide loan applications dated 07.08.2020 and 06.06.2022, Annexures-A1 and A3 (copy). 3. The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facilities to the defendants as per terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants.

¶17

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed loan-cum-hypothecation agreement dated 02.09.2020 and loan and guarantee agreement dated 23.06.2022, Annexures-A2 and A4 (copy).

¶18

It is further the case of the applicant bank 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 were declared as NPA because those became irregular. The

¶19

OA/2272/2022 HDFC BANK Vs DEEPAK CHAND AND ANOTHER 3

¶20

applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide notices dated 22.09.2022, Annexures-A7 and A8 (copy) and legal notice dated 01.10.2022 along with its postal receipts, Annexure-A9 (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.32,30,148.97/(Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Thirty Thousand One Hundred Forty Eight and Ninety Seven Paisa Only) is recoverable against defendants as per statements of accounts certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act, Annexures-A5 and A6 (copy).

¶22

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

¶23

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 . 7. In support of contents of the Original Application, affidavit of evidence of Ms. Samandeep Kaur Sekhon, Legal Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶24

This Tribunal has heard ex parte arguments advanced by Ms Aishwarya Chandan, Manager Legal of the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶25

It was argued Ms Aishwarya Chandan, Manager Legal 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

¶26

OA/2272/2022 HDFC BANK Vs DEEPAK CHAND AND ANOTHER 4

¶27

Annexures-P/A, A1 to A9, 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.32,30,148.97/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Thirty Thousand One Hundred Forty Eight and Ninety Seven Paisa Only) from the defendants, from the date of filing the present Original Application, till realization of the amount.

¶28

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed rate of interest @8.30% per annum plus penal interest @2% per annum in vehicle loan and @8.26% per annum plus penal interest @2% per annum in commercial equipment loan. In loan-cum-hypothecation agreement dated 02.09.2020 and loan and guarantee agreement dated 23.06.2022, Annexures-A2 and A4 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @8.30% per annum and @8.26% per annum.

¶29

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 vehicle, 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 @9% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till

¶30

OA/2272/2022 HDFC BANK Vs DEEPAK CHAND AND ANOTHER 5

¶31

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

¶32

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with cost declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.32,30,148.97/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Thirty

¶33

Thousand One Hundred Forty Eight and Ninety Seven Paisa Only) with current and future simple interest @9% per annum w.e.f. 21.10.2022 , 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 applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 26.09.2023.

¶36

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.

¶37

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

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Deepak Chand Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Deepak Chand 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

Idbi Bank versus M/s Smartway Group

Union Bank of India versus Umesh

Idbi Bank versus Sushanta Kumar

State Bank of India versus Buta Singh

Ms Govindraj Traders through Its Prop Shri Vijay So Vinayak Keshattiwar versus State Bank of India

Ms Dhanshri Lal Hira Hari Patanjali Jila Vitarak Kendra and Ors. versus State Bank of India