Allowed

Indusind Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Harnek Singh and Others

DRT27 May 2024OA/2000/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act by a bank against borrowers and guarantors for recovery of an agricultural loan. The Tribunal declared the borrowers liable to pay the outstanding amount with uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and authorized execution proceedings under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs.93,71,722.00 jointly and severally with simple interest at 8% p.a.; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Indusind Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Harnek Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.2000/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 03.11.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 27.05.2024

¶6

Indusind Bank Ltd., 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 2401 General Thimmayya Road Contonment, Pune-411001 and branches at different places throughout India including one at Indusind Bank Limited, SCO No.62, 2^nd Floor, Sector 32-C, Chandigarh and also at Ludhiana, through its Attorney Sh. Deepak Goyal of Applicant Bank

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Harnek Singh, R/O H.NO.37, Village Matorarha, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala-147202 (Borrower cum Mortgagor)

¶10

Ms. Gurdev Kaur, R/O H.NO.37, Village Matorarha, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala-147202 (Co-Borrower)

¶11

Sh. Harmel Singh, R/O H.NO.37, Village Matorarha, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala-147202 (Guarantor)

¶12

Ms. Sarabjit Kaur, R/O H.NO.38, Village Matorarha, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala-147202 (Guarantor)

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Ms. Dipti Toni, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gagandeep Toni, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex-parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.93,71,722.00 (Rupees Ninety Three Lacs Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two only). The Original Application has been

¶18

¶19

filed through Sh. Deepak Goyal, Authorised Representative of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 01.09.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 and 2 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Agriculture Cash Credit Limit of Rs.75.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 08.10.2015, which
isAnnexure A2to this OA. Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 stood as
guarantor vide Guarantee Forms dated 08.10.2015, which is
Annexure A3to this OA
3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the Agriculture Cash Credit Limit of Rs.75.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 27.11.2015, which is
Annexure A4to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly
accepted by the defendants.
4. Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e.
total land measuring 3.90 Acres detailed as:
a. Land measuring 28K-0M (3.40 acres)situated at Village
Matorda, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala (Punjab)
b. Land measuring 1Bigha-19Biswa (0.40 acres)situated at Village
Ram Singh Nau, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala (Punjab) vide Letter to joint sub registrar for creation of charge and Declaration under Section 4(1)bearing Rapat no.135dated30.11.2015with self
declaration and their translations, which areAnnexures A9 and A10
to this OA
Documents executed:- Agreement for Hypothecation, D.P. Notes and
Deed of Guarantee all dated 28.11.2015, which areAnnexures A5 to
A8to this OA; Legal Notice dated 30.08.2022 and 06.10.2022 along
with Postal Receipts, which areAnnexures A11 to A22to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which isAnnexure A23to
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.93,71,722.00, which is recoverable and the defendants

¶21

¶22

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.

¶23

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 28.03.2024.

¶24

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Deepak Goyal, Authorized Representative, Indusind Bank Limited h as been filed.

¶25

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

It was argued by learned proxy 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 A23 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.93,71,722.00 (Rupees Ninety Three Lacs Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two 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.

¶27

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @12%p.a. plus penal interest @6%p.a. with half yearly rests from 17.08.2022 till the realization.

¶28

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

¶29

¶30

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.93,71,722.00 (Rupees Ninety Three Lacs Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two 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. 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 11.06.2024. 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: 27.05.2024

¶32

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

Indusind Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Harnek Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indusind Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Harnek 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Manjinder Singh

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Aman Deep

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Buta Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Gurcharan Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jaswant Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Gurmail Kaur and Another