Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Davinderpal Singh Kang and Another

DRT8 Aug 2024OA/1281/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against borrowers and guarantor for recovery of Rs.55,73,132 as NPA loans. The bank was entitled to recover the sum with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the filing date.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.55,73,132 jointly and severally from respondents with current and future simple interest @8% p.a. till realization.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Davinderpal Singh Kang and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1281/2023 PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.11.2023 DATE OF DECISION: 08.08.2024 HDFC Bank Ltd., a banking company, carrying on banking business under Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under The Companies Act ,1956 and having its registered Office at HDFC BANK House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013 whereas branch at “Moga, District Moga (Punjab)” through Pooja Arora, Senior Manager (Agriculture legal), H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd., Ludhiana Branch, District Ludhiana (Punjab) being Power of Attorney holder of applicant Bank.

¶4

…	…..Applicant
Versus
1. Sh. Davinderpal Singh Kang S/o Sh. Raghbir Sin Village Killi Gandran Radarwala, Tehsil Dharamkot, (Punjab) -142043	gh Kang, R/o District Moga (Borrower)
2. Sh. Dilbag Singh S/o Sh. Gurnek Singh, R/o Village D Singh Wala, Tehsil & District Moga (Punjab) -142011	hurkot Charat
	(Guarantor)
….…	…Defendants
Advocates: Argued by Sh. Anup Prajapati, Advocate proxy for Bharadwaj, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte FINAL ORDER	Sh. Saurabh
1. Present Original Application was instituted by the	applicant bank
under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Bank	s and Financial
Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for	recovery of
Rs.55,73,132.00 (Rupees Fifty Five Lakh Seventy Three	Thousand One
Hundred & Thirty Two Only). The Original Application	has been filed
Ms.Pooja Arora, Senior Manager of the applicant	bank, who is

¶5

¶6

competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 16.12.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶7

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant No.1 approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.45.00 Lacs and Dropline Overdraft Limit 10.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 08.10.2021, which are Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no.2 proposed as Guarantor. Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor.

¶8

The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.41.50 Lacs, Overdraft Limit Rs.5.50 Lacs & Term Loan of Rs.2.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 22.10.2021, which are Annexure A3 to A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶9

Defendants No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 128 Kanal-00 Marla situated at R/o Village Killi Gandran Radarwala, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga vide Letter to Sub Registar for creation of charge bearing vasika no.352A a nd Declaration U/s 4(1) both dated 10.11.2021, which are Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶10

Documents executed:- Agreement for Overdraft, Agreement for Overdraft, Agreement for Term Loan all dated 01.11.2021, w hich are Annexure A6, A7 & A8 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 30.08.2023 with Postal receipts, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Account Statement of KCC Limit, OD Limit & Term Loan with Certificate, which are Annexures A11 to A13 to this OA.

¶11

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in all the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.55,73,132.00 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.

¶12

¶13

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 30.05.2024.

¶14

In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed.

¶15

Heard ex parte arguments and perused record.

¶16

It was argued by learned proxy counsel 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 A13 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, all the 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.55,73,132.00 (Rupees Fifty Five Lakh Seventy Three Thousand One Hundred & Thirty Two Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of all the accounts.

¶17

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @11.00%p.a. plus penal interest @2.00%p.a. from 29.08.2023 the realization.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. in all 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.55,73,132.00 (Rupees Fifty Five Lakh Seventy Three Thousand One Hundred & Thirty Two Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%P.A. in all 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. 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 31.08.2024. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 08.08.2024

¶21

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

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Davinderpal Singh Kang and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Davinderpal Singh Kang 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

Sandeep Kaur and Another versus Canara Bank and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Rajwinder Singh

Union Bank of India versus Ritu Devi and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Kiranjit Singh and Others

Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited versus Sukhpal Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jaswant Singh