Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Rajwant Singh And Another

DRT15 Dec 2023OA/251/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by HDFC Bank under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act for recovery of approximately Rs. 41.31 lacs from two defendants. The court upheld the liability for loan dues and awarded a uniform interest rate of 8.51%, directing the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; respondents liable to pay Rs. 41,31,368.67 plus interest at 8.51% p.a.; enforcement via SARFAESI or personal assets permitted.

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Rajwant Singh And Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.251/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.01.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 15.12.2023

¶6

HDFC Bank is a body incorporate under the name and title as HDFC Bank Ltd. 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 Centre, Chembar Road, New Main Post Office, Moga (Punjab) through its Principal Officer and Constituted Attorney, Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Legal Manager, Posted at HDFC Bank, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Rajwant Singh S/o Sh. Sukhdev Singh, R/o H.No.365, Manawan, Near Gurudwara, Moga- 152028

¶10

Sh. Manjeet Singh S/o Sh. Avtar Singh, R/o H.No.43, Manwan, Near Gurudwara, Moga- 152028

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. K.P.S. Dhillon, 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.41,31,368.67p (Rupees Forty One Lacs Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Eight and Paisa Sixty Seven only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Legal Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original

¶16

¶17

Application vide Power of Attorney dated 03.11.2021, which is Annexure P/A to this OA.

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Vehicle Loan-I of Rs.14.73 Lacs for purchase of TATA 4018, Vehicle Loan-II of Rs.26,96,234.00 for purchase of TATA 4923 and for a loan of Rs.4.00 Lacs for making of body of the vehicle vide Loan Application dated 27.11.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the Vehicle Loan-I of Rs.14.73 Lacs, Vehicle Loan-II of Rs.26,96,234.00 and a Loan of Rs.4.00 Lacs for making of body of the Vehicle and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

Defendant No.1 had hypothecated his movable properties detailed as:a) Vehicle namely TATA 4018 bearing Chassis No.MAT447220D3D08761, Engine No.B591803231D63322312 and Registration No.PB05Y9488; and b) Vehicle namely TATA 4923 bearing Chassis No.MAT704106H3K27182, Engine No.92304071K63632193 and Registration No.PB05AF0088; vide Loan Agreements dated 17.11.2016 and 04.12.2017, which are Annexures A2 and A3 to this OA. Documents executed: - Statements of accounts, which are Annexures A4 to A6 to this OA and Notices dated 04.12.2021 and 02.12.2021, which are Annexures A7 and A8 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.41,31,368.67p, 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.

¶20

¶21

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 04.08.2023. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rajendra Prasad, Legal Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned 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 A8 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 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.41,31,368.67p (Rupees Forty One Lacs Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Eight and Paisa Sixty Seven 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @13.00%p.a. in Vehicle loan-I bearing account No.82312503 and @8.51%p.a. in Vehicle loan-II bearing account No.82927259 and in loan account bearing account no.82927260 along with @2%p.a. penal interest with monthly rests in all, from 03.12.2021 till the realization. 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

¶22

¶23

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 just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.51%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.41,31,368.67p (Rupees Forty One Lacs Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Eight and Paisa Sixty Seven only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.51%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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 27.12.2023.

¶25

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.

¶26

Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal.

¶27

Dated: 15.12.2023

¶28

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Rajwant Singh And Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Rajwant Singh And Another

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 Sh. Mohinder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Hemkunt Auto Fuels

Union Bank of India versus M/s Shri Waheguru Industries

Punjab National Bank, versus Sh. Rakesh Kumar

Indian Bank versus Sh. Buta Singh

Hdfc Bank Limited, versus Sh. Malkit Singh and Others