Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mitanshu Garg

DRT11 Sept 2024OA/135/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of a housing loan default. The tribunal adjusted the interest rate to 8.00% per annum and directed recovery from mortgaged and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.38,83,868.69p with interest @8.00%p.a. from date of filing; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Mitanshu Garg — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.135/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 05.10.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.09.2024

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Central Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 and one of its Branch Offices at Asset Recovery Branch, Karlras Builiding, First Floor, B-XV-295/C. Nr. Oswal Street, Miller Ganj, G.T. Road, Ludhiana Punjab through its Chief Manager Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant Bank/Plaintiff

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Mitanshu Garg S/o Sh. Sandeep Garg, R/o Flat No.43, Ground Floor, LRC Homes, Village Kishanpura, MC Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab-140603

¶10

2^nd Address:- House No.176, Hill View Colony, Dhakauli, Mohali 160104. (Borrower)

¶11

……Defendant

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Karan Singla, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendant is ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.38,83,868.69p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Sixty Nine Paise Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Chief Manager o f the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the

¶16

¶17

Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 25.03.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Housing Loan of Rs.32.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 19.10.2019. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the Housing Loan of Rs.32.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 23.10.2019, which is AnnexureA2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Flat No.43, Ground Floor, LRC Homes, Village Kishanpura (Dhakauli), Type 3 BHK, MC Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab vide Equitable Mortgag of Sale Deed bearing vasika no.2019-20/13/1/7828 dated 29.10.2019 along with its translation, which is Annexure A10 to this OA. Documents executed:- Housing Loan Agreement, Demand Promissory Note, Letters of Undertaking, Interest Agreement, Letter of Continuity & Simple Agreement all dated 25.10.2019, which are Annexures A3 to A8 to this OA; Request Letter, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Notice dated 01.07.2023, which is Annexure A11 to this OA and Statement of account with banker certificate dated 03.10.2023, which is Annexure A12 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.38,83,868.69p, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant is served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 01.08.2024.

¶19

¶20

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Chief Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed.

¶21

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶22

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 A12 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they 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, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.38,83,868.69p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Sixty Nine Paise Only) along with interest from the defendant, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @8.30%p.a. with quarterly rests from 01.09.2023 till the realization. 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 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 @8.00%p.a. in 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.

¶23

¶24

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.38,83,868.69p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Eight and Sixty Nine Paise Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account 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 defendant 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 defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶25

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 07.10.2024. 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: 11.09.2024

¶26

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

Union Bank of India v. Mitanshu Garg

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mitanshu Garg

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

Bank of India versus Joginder Singh and Others

Indian Bank versus Kumba Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Gurpreet Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Angrej Kaur and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Kuldeep Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Balwant Singh and Others