Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Kirandeep Kaur

DRT21 Aug 2024OA/1131/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this ex parte application, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Punjab National Bank's claim for recovery of approximately 27 lakhs with interest against Kirandeep Kaur, who failed to appear despite summons. The court directed recovery via sale of mortgaged property and pending liabilities.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.27,08,782/- with interest at 11.25% per annum allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Recovery Officer directed to distribute sale proceeds.

Punjab National Bank versus Kirandeep Kaur — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1131 of 2022 Date of Institution: 16.05.2022 Date of Decision: 21.08.2024

¶4

Punjab National Bank, having its branch office at different places including one at Qadian Road, Batala, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Kirandeep Kaur W/o Baljinder Singh, R/o Village Bhamboi, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Sh. Ankit Kaushal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- Ex parte. OA for the Recovery of Rs.27,08,782/- with interest @11.25% per annum with yearly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 16.05.2022.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Punjab National 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.27,08,782/- with interest against Kirandeep Kaur (defendant).

¶12

Bank’s case is that on 20.08.2014, it had granted KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 lacs to defendant for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged her immovable property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.25% per annum with yearly rests. On 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.27,08,782/was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶13

¶14

On 27.06.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 15.03.2023, she was proceeded ex parte .

¶15

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Naresh Gupta, Authorized Representative along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-9. 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 loan of Rs.15.00 lacs and on 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.27,08,782/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.27,08,782/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Two Only) with interest @11.25% per annum with yearly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 16.05.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application, as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 24.09.2024 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property 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: 21.08.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Punjab National Bank v. Kirandeep Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Kirandeep Kaur

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

Pradeep Bhanuvadan Shah and Ors. versus Hero Housing Finance Limited

Rambhai M Gondaliya versus Icici Bank Limited

Ms Ekta Cold Storage versus Indian Bank

State Bank of India versus Harvel Singh

Harikishan Shankarji Gogikar a K a Harikrishanan Shankarji Gudipati versus Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd.

Mr Anil Anant Mhadaye versus The Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.