Partly allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Davinder Singh

DRT18 Apr 2024OA/1397/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Out of Court Application filed by HDFC Bank for recovery of dues from the applicant bank's main borrower who mortgaged property, while dismissing the claim against the guarantor on grounds of limitation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.42,12,994.53 with 12% interest allowed against the main borrower via sale of mortgaged property; claim against guarantor dismissed as time-barred; Recovery Certificate directed.

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Davinder Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1397 of 2022 Date of Institution: 04.07.2022 Date of Decision: 18.04.2024

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd., having a branch office at Sitti Guno and Abohar, District- Fazilka, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Davinder Singh S/o Sh. Raj Singh, R/o VPO Rampura, Near Panchayat Ghar, Tehsil Abohar, District- Fazilka, Punjab.

¶8

Sh. Satpal S/o Sh. Pirthi Raj, R/o Village Mehrajpur, Tehsil Abohar, District- Fazilka, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Soarabh Modi, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- Ex parte.

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.42,12,994.53p with interest from 04.07.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

HDFC Bank Ltd., (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.42,12,994.53p with interest against Sh. Davinder Singh And Another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 30.01.2015, it had granted Retail Agri Cash Credit Loan (KCC) of Rs.15.00 lacs and KGC- Term Loan of Rs.5.00 lacs, totaling Rs.20.00 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, total land admeasuring 80 Kanal 12 Marla, (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The said loan facilities were chargeable to different rate of interest. On 30.09.2021, a sum of Rs.42,12,994.53p was due from the defendants.

¶16

¶17

Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 26.07.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 03.08.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶19

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Parampreet Singh Kahlon, Assistant Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A- 10.

¶20

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 facilities of Rs.20.00 lacs and on 30.09.2021, a sum of Rs.42,12,994.53p was due.

¶21

5(a). The loan was given by the bank in the year 2015 and the present OA was filed in the year 2022. Accordingly, the OA against defendant no.2 is time barred. Since, defendant no.1 had created the mortgage, the OA against defendant no.1 on the basis of creation of mortgage is within time.

¶22

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.42,12,994.53p (Rupees Forty Two Lacs Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Four And Paisa Fifty Three Only) with interest @12% per annum with half yearly rests from 04.07.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs against defendant no.1. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property i.e. total land admeasuring 80 Kanal 12 Marla, (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application) only.

¶23

¶24

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 20.05.2024 , 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 . 10. 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: 18.04.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Davinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Davinder 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

Asifbhai Satarbhai Rathod versus Ujjivan Small Finance Bank Limited

Bank of Baroda versus Zinox Industries

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Jai Maa Ambay Beverages

Ms Rathnam Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. versus Syndicate Bank

Uco Bank versus Paramjit Singh

Md Hadikul Islam versus Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India)