Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Harminder Singh and Another

DRT9 Sept 2024OA/10/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of an outstanding debt of approx. Rs. 35 lakhs secured by mortgage and hypothecation, fixing interest at 8% p.a. and directing issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Declaration that respondents are liable to pay Rs.34,98,846.06 with interest @8% p.a.; Issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Harminder Singh and Another — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.10/2022 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 13.12.2021

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 09.09.2024

¶5

Indian Overseas Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Central Office at 762, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002 and amongst other places a branch office at A.G. Sudhar, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana, through its duly Constituted Attorney Smt. Alka, Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, A.G. Sudhar Branch, Ludhiana.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Harminder Singh S/o Sh. Harbans Singh

¶9

Sh. Jaswinder Singh S/o Sh. S. Gurbax Singh

¶10

Both resident of village Halwara, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates: Argued by Sh. Surinder K. Chawla, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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 defendants for recovery of Rs.34,98,846.06p (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Six and Paisa Six only). The Original Application has been filed through Smt. Alka, Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 04.09.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants no.1 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Cash Credit Limit (KCC) of Rs.14.00 Lacs under Kisan Credit Card Scheme and Term Loan of Rs.1.00 Lacs under IOB Green Card vide Loan applications dated

¶16

¶17

21.06.2012, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor Guarantor’s Statement dated 21.06.2012, which is Annexure A3 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit (KCC) of Rs.14.00 Lacs under Kisan Credit Card Scheme and later sanctioned Term Loan of Rs.1.00 Lacs under IOB Green Card vide Credit Sanction Advice dated 02.07.2012, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 16K-0M situated at Village Halwara-2, Tehsil Raikot, District Ludhiana (Punjab) vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing v asika No.1649 dated 2 2.06.2012 and Jamabandi for the year 2008-2009 along with their Translations, which are Annexures A5 & A6 to this OA. Documents executed:- Valuation Report dated 30.06.2012, which is Annexure A/A to this OA; Guarantee for Cash Credits, Letters of Hypothecation, Demand Promissory Note, Demand Promissory Note Delivery Letter and Letter of Installment all dated 02.07.2012, which are Annexures A4, A7 to A9, A11 to A13 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 20.02.2021 along with its translations and postal Receipts, which are Annexures A14 to A16 to this OA; Certified Copies of Statement of Accounts along with Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act, which is Annexure A19 to this OA and Revival Letters dated 10.04.2015, 22.03.2018 and 16.02.2021, which are Annexures A20 to A22 to this OA.

¶19

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.34,98,846.06p, 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. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal and defendant No.1 appeared in person and sought time to

¶20

¶21

engage an advocate but not engaged any advocate. Since no one appeared on behalf of defendants, they were proceeded ex-parte on 06.08.2024.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Smt. Alka, Manager, Indian Overseas Bank has been filed.

¶23

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned counsel (through Video Conferencing) 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 A22 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 loan 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.34,98,846.06p (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Six and Paisa Six 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 @9.95%p.a.with half yearly rests in both from 01.06.2021 till the realization.

¶25

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 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 @8.00%p.a. in

¶26

¶27

both 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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.34,98,846.06p (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Six and Paisa Six only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both 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.

¶29

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 04.10.2024.

¶31

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.

¶32

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 09.09.2024

¶33

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

Indian Overseas Bank v. Harminder Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Harminder 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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Joginder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Messrs Prem Marble and Building Material and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Rajwinder Singh and others

Uco Bank versus Ak Yarn Plus and others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Johit Arora

Punjab National Bank versus Parvinder Singh Alias Malwinder Singh and Others