Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Najar Singh and Others

DRT23 Dec 2024OA/1386/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act for recovery of Rs. 26,32,888 from four defaulted borrowers. The court ordered recovery via sale of assets, allowing reduced interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 11.5% and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 26,32,888 with 8% simple interest via sale of assets and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Najar Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1386/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.12.2024

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, a banking company, carrying on the banking business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel-(West), Mumbai-400013, whereas branch amongst other places on at “Bhawanigarh Branch, District Sangrur (Punjab)” through Ms. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager (Agri. Legal), HDFC Bank Ltd. Ludhiana Branch District Ludhiana(Punjab) being Power of Attorney Holder of applicant.

¶7

.. … …..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Najar Singh S/o Sh. Hari Singh, R/o Village Bakhtri, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur(Punjab)-146026

¶10

Sh. Saveg Singh S/o Sh. Bahadar Singh, R/o Village Bakhtri, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur(Punjab)-146026

¶11

Sh. Baghel Singh S/o Sh. Bahadar Singh, R/o Village Bakhtri, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur(Punjab)-146026

¶12

Sh. Jagdeep Singh S/o Sh. Dayal Singh, R/o H. No. 296, Village Rampura, Tehsil and District Sangrur (Punjab)

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Anup Prajapati, Advocate proxy for Sh. Saurabh Bharadwaj, Advocate for Applicant None for Defendant no.1 Defendant nos.2 to 4 are ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant

¶18

under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of

¶19

¶20

Rs.26,32,888.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized Representative of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 28.07.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of CC Limit of Rs.19.50 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 27.11.2012, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs.19.10 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.6.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 11.12.2012, which are Annexures A3 and A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶22

Defendant nos.1 to 3 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 53Kanal-0Marla situated at Village Bakhtari, Tehsil & District Sangrur vide Registered Mortgage deed bearing vasika no.2350 d ated 18.12.2012 with its translation, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶23

Documents executed:- Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuity, Agreement for Term Loan and Agreement for Overdraft dated 24.12.2012, which are Annexures A5 to A8 to this OA; Demand Notice dated 25.03.2022 along with postal receipt, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Statements of Accounts along with Certificate under Bankers Book of Evidence, which are Annexures A11 and A12 to this OA.

¶24

The loan accounts became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.26,32,888.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶25

¶26

The defendants were served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant nos.2 to 4 and they were proceeded ex-parte on 18.12.2024. Sh. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendant no.1 and filed Power of Attorney but did not filed WS within stipulated period. Therefore, opportunity to file WS by defendant no.1 was closed and his defense was struck of on 18.12.2024.

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized Representative, HDFC Bank Limited, has been filed. 8. Heard arguments Ld. Counsel for applicant. None appeared for defendants for arguments. Perused record. 9. 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 A12 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 loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, 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.26,32,888.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50%p.a. from 06.03.2022 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

¶29

¶30

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 just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in 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.26,32,888.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in 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 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.

¶31

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 13.02.2025

¶32

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant 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: 23.12.2024

¶33

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶34

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Najar Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Najar Singh and Others

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

Messrs Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. versus Messrs Pursharthi Dhaba and Others

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Harbhajan Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Surjit Kaur and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Satnam Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Gurbachan Singh and Another

Bank of Baroda versus Messrs Jagdish Singh Contractor and Others