Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh Sukhwinder Pal Singh

DRT21 Aug 2024OA/122/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Canara Bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for the recovery of Rs. 37,41,473/plus interest against two defendants who failed to appear, directing the issuance of a recovery certificate and the sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 37,41,473/- with interest at 9.55% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; sale of mortgaged property.

Canara Bank versus Sh Sukhwinder Pal Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 122 of 2023 Date of Institution: 14.12.2022 Date of Decision: 21.08.2024

¶4

Canara Bank, branch office at Nurmahal, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Sukhwinder Pal Singh S/o Harjinder Singh, R/o Ida Khiwa, Tehsil Shahkot, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶8

Sh. Manjinder Singh S/o Kewal Singh, R/o Village Nakodar Mohalla Layewall, Tehsil Nakodar, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Satish Jaswal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- Ex parte.

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.37,41,473/- with interest @9.55% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of filing the present suit i.e. 14.12.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Canara 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.37,41,473/- with interest against Sh. Sukhwinder Pal Singh And Another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 05.11.2018, it had granted KCC Limit of Rs.24.00 lacs to defendant no.1 for agricultural purpose. Defendant no.2 stood as guarantor. To secure the loan, Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties (fully detailed in para No.5.5 of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.05% per annum with half yearly rests. On 30.09.2022, a sum of Rs.37,41,473/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶16

¶17

On 31.01.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 21.12.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶18

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Authorized Representative 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 loan of Rs.24.00 lacs and on 30.09.2022, a sum of Rs.37,41,473/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.37,41,473/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Forty One Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Three Only) with interest @9.55% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of filing the present suit i.e. 14.12.2022, 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 property, fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶19

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 .

¶20

¶21

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

Canara Bank v. Sh Sukhwinder Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh Sukhwinder Pal 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

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.