Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Sh. Gursewak Singh

DRT24 Jul 2024OA/1479/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act, 1993 filed by Central Bank of India against borrowers and a guarantor for recovery of Rs. 24,32,982.58. The Tribunal reduced the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a. and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Order for recovery of Rs. 24,32,982.58 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing till realization, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Central Bank of India versus Sh. Gursewak Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1479/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 27.05.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 24.07.2024

¶6

Central bank of India a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking Act 1970) having its Head Office at Chander Mukhi, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 and one of its branch at Mansa Tehsil & District Mansa through Ms. Mani Mittal, chief Manager, Principal Officer and duly constituted attorney.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Gursewak Singh S/o Sh. Janta Singh S/o Sh. Mal Singh, R/o Village Rarh, Tehsil & District Mansa

¶10

Smt. Harpreet Kaur W/o Sh. Gursewak Singh S/o Sh. Janta Singh, R/o Village Rarh, Tehsil & District Mansa

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Sumit Batra, Advocate proxy for Sh. Anil Pradeep Kataria, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are 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.24,32,982.58p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Thirty two Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Fifty Eight only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Mani Mittal, Chief Manager, the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 05.11.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant No.1 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.19.95 Lacs vide Loan Application, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no.2 stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.19.95 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 12.02.2015, which is Annexures A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No.1 had mortgaged her immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 40 Kanal 0 Marla situated at Village Rarh, Tehsil and District Mansa, Punjab vide Declaration U/s 4(1) bearing Vasika No.432/RC dated 20.02.2015, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Documents executed:- Term Loan Agreement, Supplementary Agreement, Loan Cum Hypothecation Agreement, D.P. note with Letter of Waiver and Form of guarantee for advances and credit generally all dated 26.02.2015, which are Annexures A5 to A9 to this OA; Recall notice dated 01.02.2022 with postal receipts, which are Annexures A10 and A11 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate dated 17.05.2022, which is Annexure A12 to this OA.

¶18

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.24,32,982.58p, 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. 6. 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 21.05.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Mani Mittal, Chief Manager, Central Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶19

¶20

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 facility which was 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, account of the defendants 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.24,32,982.58p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Thirty two Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Fifty 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 account.

¶21

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @12.25%p.a. with monthly rests from 26.01.2022 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 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 @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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.24,32,982.58p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Thirty two Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Two and Paise Fifty Eight only) Jointly and severally,

¶23

¶24

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 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 14.08.2024 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: 24.07.2024

¶25

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

Central Bank of India v. Sh. Gursewak Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Sh. Gursewak 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

Icici Bank Ltd. versus Nexus International and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Bhagwan Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Dalvir Ram

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Balwinder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Davinder Singh

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sarmel Singh and Others