Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Sh. Surender Kumar @ Surender Singh

DRT28 Aug 2023OA/997/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte application by Punjab National Bank against Surender Kumar for recovery of Rs.34,53,868.57 outstanding under a KCC facility, granting 8% simple interest pending realisation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.34,53,868.57 plus 8% simple interest w.e.f. 21.05.2022 till realization, enforceable against mortgaged property or personal assets.

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Surender Kumar @… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.997/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.05.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 28^th DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶5

Punjab National Bank , a body corporate and perpetual succession, constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970, carrying on Banking business and having its Head Office at Plot No. 4, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 and one of its Branches amongst other places is known as Mirzapur District Kurukshetra, Haryana, through Sh. Naresh Bheem, posted at Punjab National Bank, Circle SASTRA Center, Kurukshetra, Principal Officer and General Attorney

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Surender Kumar @Surender Singh s/o Sh. Jai Pal Singh R/o Village Murtzapur, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana

¶9

…..Defendant

¶10

Argued by: Ms Arpita Sonkar, Manager Law, (GPA holder) for the applicant bank Defendant ex parte vide order dated 01.05.2023

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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 defendant for recovery of Rs.34,53,868.57/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Fifty Seven Paisa

¶13

OA/997/2022 PUNJAB NAATIONAL BANK VS SURENDER KUMAR 2

¶14

Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Naresh Bheem, Principal Officer of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide power of attorney dated 05.03.2002, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶15

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for grant of KCC facility of Rs.20 lacs vide loan application dated 15.07.2014, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶16

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facility to the defendant vide sanction letter dated 28.07.2014, Annexure-A3 (copy) as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶17

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendant executed various loans and security documents, i.e. hypothecation agreement dated 20.08.2014, Annexure-A4 (copy), letter dated 20.08.2014 regarding terms and conditions, AnnexureA5 (copy), letter dated 20.08.2014 regarding consent of facility availed by the defendant, Annexure-A6 (copy), master agreement dated 20.08.2014, Annexure-A8 (copy) and letter dated 20.08.2014 regarding execution of documents, Annexure-A9 (copy).

¶18

The aforesaid loan was further secured by creation of mortgage by the defendant in respect of agricultural land measuring 56 Kanals situated in the revenue estate of Murtzapur, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5.16 of the Original Application.

¶19

OA/997/2022 PUNJAB NAATIONAL BANK VS SURENDER KUMAR 3

¶20

The documents relating to the mortgage are as under:

¶21

i. Declaration dated 20.08.2014 regarding mortgaged property, Annexure-A7 (copy).

¶22

ii. Affidavit dated 25.07.2014 regarding ownership of land, Annexure-A10 (copy).

¶23

iii. Registered mortgaged deed dated 07.08.2014, Annexure-A11 (copy).

¶24

iv. Request letter dated 19.08.2014 to the Tehsildar, Pehowa, for entry/mutation of mortgaged property, Annexure-A12 (copy).

¶25

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendant but he failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan account became irregular and it was declared as NPA on 01.05.2021. The defendants executed balance and security confirmation letters dated 20.02.2017 and 03.01.2020, Annexure-A13 (colly) (copy). The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide notices dated 30.12.2019, 06.05.2020, 09.03.2020 and 30.12.2019 and legal notice dated 28.03.2022 along with postal receipt, Annexure-A14 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶26

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.34,53,868.57/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Fifty Seven Paisa Only) is recoverable against the defendant as per statement of account dated 31.03.2022, duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, Annexure-A15 (copy).

¶27

OA/997/2022 PUNJAB NAATIONAL BANK VS SURENDER KUMAR 4

¶28

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

¶29

Notice of the Original Application was duly served upon the defendant, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendant, thus, the defendant was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 01.05.2023 . 8. In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Naresh Bheem, Senior Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶30

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by Ms Arpita Sonkar, Manager Law, (GPA holder) of the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶31

It was argued by Ms Arpita Sonkar, Manager Law, (GPA holder) that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendant for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A15 , it is clear that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. It is further clear that the defendant had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.34,53,868.57/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Fifty Three

¶32

OA/997/2022 PUNJAB NAATIONAL BANK VS SURENDER KUMAR 5

¶33

Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Fifty Seven Paisa

¶34

Only) from the defendant.

¶35

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed rate of interest @9.45% per annum with yearly rests. In hypothecation agreement dated 20.08.2014, Annexure-A4 (copy), the rate of interest has been mentioned @12.25% per annum.

¶36

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. agricultural, present conditions of economy based on agriculture, quantum of loan and 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 @8% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶37

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.34,53,868.57/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Fifty Seven Paisa Only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 21.05.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property

¶38

OA/997/2022 PUNJAB NAATIONAL BANK VS SURENDER KUMAR 6

¶39

of the defendant in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitisation 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 defendant. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶40

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 09.10.2023.

¶42

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendant through registered/speed post. This order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶43

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

Punjab National Bank v. Sh. Surender Kumar @ Surender Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Sh. Surender Kumar @ Surender 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 National Bank versus Maa Fly- Ash Bricks Industries and Others

Canara Bank versus M/s Vishwa Faishon And General Store and Others

Shreejan Cold Storage Private Limited versus Uco Bank

Sh Samarth Singh Hooda versus State Bank of India

Punjab National Bank versus Manoj Kumar Singh and others

Hdfc Bank versus P Veera Brahmaiah