Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Inderjit Singh and Another

DRT15 Jul 2024OA/1892/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicants' original application for recovery of Rs. 33,56,221.32p principal. The court decreed the debt, adjusted interest rate to 8.00% p.a., and authorized sale of mortgaged properties and attachment of assets.

What did the court decide?

Directed payment of Rs. 33,56,221.32p with 8% simple interest and powers to enforce sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Bank of India versus Sh. Inderjit Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1892/2022 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.10.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 15.07.2024

¶5

Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act No. V of 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House”, C-5, Block-G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and Branch Office amongst other places at Jagroan, District Ludhiana through its duly constituted Attorney, Sh. Ved Prakash, Chief Manager, Raikot Branch

¶6

……..Applicant Versus 1. Sh. Inderjit Singh S/o Sh. Jagir Singh, R/o Village Ajitwal, Tehsil and District Moga (Borrower/Mortgagor) 2. Sh. Kuldeep Singh S/o Sh. Nachhatar Singh, R/o Village Ajitwal, Tehsil and District Moga (Guarantor) ….……Defendants

¶7

Advocates:

¶8

Argued by Ms. Sonal Chabra, Advocate proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶9

FINAL ORDER

¶10

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.33,56,221.32p (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Fifty Six Thousand Two Hundred Twenty One and Thirty Two Paisa only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Ved Prakash, Chief Manager o f the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Authority Letter dated 13.12.2019, which is

¶11

Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶12

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant No.1 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.15.00

¶13

¶14

Lacs vide Application Form dated 16.02.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no.2 stood as guarantor.

¶15

The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 17.02.2014, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 16 Kanal 00 Marla situated at Village Ajitwal, Tehsil and District Moga, Punjab vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing Vasika No.8302 dated 07.03.2014 along with its translation, which are Annexures A8 and A8-T to this OA.

¶16

Documents executed:- Voter ID proof of defendant No.1 in File 3, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; D.P. note, Hypothecation-cum-loan agreement and Deed of guarantee all dated 18.03.2014, which are Annexures A5 to A7 to this OA; Affidavit dated 19.02.2014, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Declaration, undertaking and authority and Agreement both dated 18.03.2014, which are Annexures A10 and A11 to this OA; Acknowledgment of debt dated 26.09.2016 and 18.06.2019, which are Annexures A12 and A13 to this OA; Legal notice dated 03.06.2019, 05.09.2019, 28.05.2021 and 20.08.2022 along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A14 to A17 to this OA and Statement of account along with Certificate, which is Annexure A18 to this OA.

¶17

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.33,56,221.32p, 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 15.05.2024.

¶18

¶19

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Ved Prakash, Chief Manager, Bank of India h as been filed.

¶20

Heard ex parte arguments and 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 A18 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.33,56,221.32p (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Fifty Six Thousand Two Hundred Twenty One and Thirty Two Paisa 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 @10.30%p.a. with half yearly rests plus @2%p.a. penal interest from 18.08.2022 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.

¶23

¶24

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.33,56,221.32p (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Fifty Six Thousand Two Hundred Twenty One and Thirty Two Paisa 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 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.

¶25

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶26

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶27

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this

¶28

Tribunal on 02.08.2024.

¶29

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.

¶30

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 15.07.2024

¶31

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

Bank of India v. Sh. Inderjit Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Inderjit Singh 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Hardev Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Satnam Singh and Another

Bank of India versus Malook Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Jagdish Singh

Union Bank of India, versus Sh. Avtar Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Radhey Ram and Another