Allowed

Indian Bank, v. Sh. Avtar Singh

DRT22 Sept 2023OA/619/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dr. Tribunal allowed Original Application filed by Indian Bank for recovery of agricultural loan dues. After hearing ex-parte arguments, the court ruled in favour of the bank, directing recovery of the principal amount along with simple interest at 10% p.a. and authorizing Recovery Officer to issue Sale Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.39,57,959.00 with costs and simple interest at 10% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued.

Indian Bank, versus Sh. Avtar Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.619/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.04.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.09.2023 Indian Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at 66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai and Corporate Office at 254-260, Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600014 and having its Zonal office at Chandigarh and amongst other branches, a Branch at Malerkotla through its Assistant Manager Sh. Sumeet Yadav s/o Sh. Hari Singh Yadav, duly constituted and Authorized Signatory

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Avtar Singh s/o Sh. Bachan Singh r/o VPO Chiniwal Kalan, Tehsil & District Barnala, Punjab-148104

¶9

….……Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Ms. Deepika Mittal, counsel for the applicant Defendant is ex-parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.39,57,959.00 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Nine only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sumeet Yadav, Assistant Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 05.04.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶14

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for agriculture loan under Akshay Krishi Kisan Credit Card (KCC) scheme of Rs.21,96,150.00 vide Loan application dated 25.01.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA.

¶16

The applicant Bank sanctioned the agriculture loan under Akshay Krishi Kisan Credit Card (KCC) scheme of Rs.21,96,150.00 vide Appraisal Form, Memorandum of Sanction dated 28.01.2013 and Sanction Letter dated 28.01.2013, which are Annexures A4, A5 and A6 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶17

Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 16K-10M situated at Village Chiniwal Kalan, Tehsil & District Barnala, Punjab; vide Mortgage Deed dated 29.01.2013 and Jamabandi for the year 2009-10 along with their translations, which are Annexures A10 and A11 to this OA. Documents executed:- Order dated 10.01.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; D.P. Note, Hypothecation Agreement both dated 15.02.2013, which are Annexures A7 and A8 to this OA; Consent Clause Executed by Borrower, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Legal notice dated 18.11.2017, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Copy of Acknowledgment dated 14.03.2019, which is Annexure A13 to this OA and Statement of account dated 30.12.2021, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶18

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.39,57,959.00, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶19

¶20

The defendant was served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and was proceeded exparte on 04.09.2023.

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sumeet Yadav, Assistant Manager, Indian Bank h as 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 A14 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.39,57,959.00 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Nine only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶22

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @14.00%p.a. along with @2%p.a. penal interest with monthly rests from 31.12.2021 till the realization.

¶23

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 defendant, 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

¶24

¶25

just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @10.00%p.a. in the loan account 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 defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.39,57,959.00 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Nine only), with costs, current and future simple interest @10.00%p.a. in the loan account 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 defendant 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 defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶26

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 03.10.2023. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal. Dated: 22.09.2023

¶27

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

Indian Bank, v. Sh. Avtar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank, v. Sh. Avtar 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 and Sind Bank, versus M/S Sandeep Enterprises and Another

Union Bank of India, versus Sh. Dinesh Kumar Saini and Another

Punjab National Bank, versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Grewal Sweets and Dairy Products

Canara Bank versus M/s Tayal Builders

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur