Allowed

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sh Harnek Singh

DRT20 Nov 2023OA/821/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs. 27,63,624.70 along with interest. The court found the bank's case proved via affidavit and documents and allowed sale of mortgaged property and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs. 27,63,624.70 with interest at 10% p.a. from 31.03.2022; directed sale of mortgaged land and distribution of proceeds.

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh Harnek Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 821/2022 Date of Institution: 21.04.2022 Date of Decision: 20.11.2023

¶4

Punjab Gramin Bank, having a Branch Office at Bhai Jeeta Singh Market Complex, Kacheri Chowk, Barnala, District Barnala.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Harnek Singh S/o Sh. Harbant Singh, R/o Kapoora Pati VPO Kheri Kalan, District Sangrur, Punjab.

¶8

Sh. Chajju Singh S/o Sh. Harbant Singh, R/o Kapoora Pati VPO Kheri Kalan, District Sangrur, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Soarabh Modi, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants – ex parte

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.27,63,624.70p with interest @10% per annum with yearly rests from 31.03.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Punjab Gramin Bank, (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.27,63,624.70p with interest against Sh. Harnek Singh and another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 14.09.2013, it had granted a KCC Limit of Rs.6,80,000/- and KGC Term Loan of Rs.7,41,000/- to defendants for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendants had mortgaged their land (fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10% per annum with yearly rests. On 31.03.2022, a sum of Rs.27,63,624.70p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶16

On 20.05.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not

¶17

¶18

put in appearance. Vide order dated 19.12.2022, they were proceeded_ex_ parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Baldev Kumar Bansal, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-13.
5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered
view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the KCC
Limit of Rs.6,80,000/- and KGC Term Loan of Rs.7,41,000/- and on 31.03.2022, a sum of Rs.27,63,624.70p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.27,63,624.70p (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Sixty Three Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Four and Paisa Seventy Only) with interest @10% per annum with yearly rests from 31.03.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be
joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
21.12.2023, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgage land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20- AB) of the Act.
10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to
the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.
Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 20.11.2023 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh Pankaj

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sh Harnek Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sh Harnek 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

Rbl Bank Limited versus Rajesh Gupta

State Bank of India versus Abhishek Yadav

Punjab National Bank versus Mohit Kumar Arora

Canara Bank versus C K Karigowda

Icici Bank Limited versus Prashanth J

Mrs Shakira Tahsin versus Indian Bank