Allowed

Indian Bank v. Mahinder Singh

DRT11 Nov 2024OA/1229/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application filed under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act, 1993, for recovery of a defaulted loan. The respondent's loan account was classified as NPA. The Tribunal directed the respondent to pay the principal amount with interest at 8% p.a., permitting recovery from mortgaged properties or personal assets if necessary.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs. 59,29,106.00 with costs and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. Recovery via sale of mortgaged properties or attachment of personal assets directed.

Indian Bank versus Mahinder Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1229/2022 PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.05.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 11.11.2024

¶5

Indian Bank, (Erstwhile Allahabad Bank) is a Banking Company having its Registered Office at 66 Rajaji Salai, PB No.1384, Chennai, Tamil Nadu-600001, having its local Office at Malerkotla, Branch The Mall Opp. Vikas Bhavan, Malerkotla, Rajkot Road, Thandi Sarak District Sangrur Punjab-148023 through its Authorized Officer and duly Constituted Attorney Holder Sh. Sumeet Yadav Presently posted as Manager at Indian Bank Chandigarh.

¶6

……..Applicant Versus

¶7

Mr. Mahinder Singh S/o Sh. Bikker Singh R/o Amra Patti, VPO Jhaloor Tehsil & District Barnala-152116.

¶8

….……Defendants

¶9

Advocates:

¶10

Argued by Sh. Kaveesh, Advocate proxy for Sh. S.K. Dhir, Advocate for Applicant (through VC) None for Defendants

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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 defendant for recovery of Rs.59,29,106.00p (Rupees Fifty Nine Lacs Twenty Nine Thousand One Hundred & Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sumeet Yadav, Manager o f the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 05.04.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.29.28 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 05.07.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and further defendant approached the applicant for restructuring the KCC

¶13

¶14

Limit by converting the overdue interest into fresh Term Loan of Rs.15,13,338.00 vide Letter for reshaping of the repayment schedule dated 27.07.2018 and L etter of request for converting crop loan into Term Loan both dated 08.10.2018, which are Annexures A13 and A14 to this OA.

¶15

The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 20.00 Lacs for the 1^st year and to be enhanced upto Rs.29.28 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 16.07.2013, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and further applicant sanctioned restructuring the KCC Limit by converting the overdue interest into fresh Term Loan of Rs.15,13,338.00 vide Sanction Letter dated 08.10.2018, which is Annexure A12 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant vide Acknowledgment dated 16.07.2013, which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶16

Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 23Kanal-8Marla situated at Village Sanghera Tehsil & District Barnala Punjab vide Registered Mortgage Deed dated 05.07.2013 with its translation, which is Annexure A16 to this OA. Documents executed:- Amalgamation Notification dated 28.03.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note & Hypothecation Agreement both dated 19.08.2013 & 20.01.2016, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA; Letter dated 04.08.2014, 10.04.2016 & 07.01.2020, which are Annexures A8 , A10 & A15 to this OA; Copy of the Legal Notice dated 07.12.2015 & 18.11.2017, which are Annexures A9 & A11 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Debts and security dated 24.05.2018 & 18.07.2020, which is Annexure A17 to this OA; Recall Notice, which is Annexure A18 to this OA and Interest Certificate with Bankers Certificate, which are Annexures A19 & A20 to this OA.

¶17

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.59,29,106.00p, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but they did not repay the

¶18

¶19

outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal. Sh. Mohammed Jamil, appeared on behalf of defendant and filed his Power of Attorney but did not filed WS within stipulated time. Therefore, opportunity to file WS was closed and defense was struck of on 23.07.2024.

¶20

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sumeet Yadav, Authorized Officer, Indian Bank h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments of Ld. Counsel for applicant. None appeared for defendant. Perused record 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel through Video Conferencing that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A20 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.59,29,106.00p (Rupees Fifty Nine Lac Twenty Nine Thousand One Hundred & Six Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶21

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. from 25.03.2022 till the realization.

¶22

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

¶23

¶24

of the defendant, 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 @08.00%p.a. in both the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.59,29,106.00p (Rupees Fifty Nine Lac Twenty Nine Thousand One Hundred & Six Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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 shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/ mortgaged properties of the defendant in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 03.12.2024. 15. Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant bank and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 11.11.2024 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Indian Bank v. Mahinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Mahinder 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

Indian Overseas Bank versus Balraj Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Nitin Gupta and Others

Axis Bank Limited versus Tasvir Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sakinder Singh and ANother

Bank of India versus Gurcharan Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Davinder Kumar