Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Mr. Ranjit Singh

DRT21 Nov 2024OA/2174/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs.30,16,485.90p with interest after being satisfied that the loan of Rs.20 Lacs was advanced and remained unpaid. The application was proceeded ex parte due to non-appearance of defendants.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.30,16,485.90p with interest at 8.75% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale of mortgaged land and crops.

Punjab National Bank versus Mr. Ranjit Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2174/2022

¶4

Date of Institution: 04.11.2022 Date of Decision: 21.11.2024

¶5

Punjab National Bank, one of its branches at Punjab National Bank, Village Ghasitpur, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr. Ranjit Singh S/o Sh. Bishan Singh, R/o Village Udhowal, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶9

Mr. Bhupinder Singh S/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, R/o Village Udhowal, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Ms. Ritika Kansal, proxy Counsel for Sh. SN Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶13

Defendants – ex parte .

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.30,16,485.90p with interest @8.75% per annum with half yearly rests from 04.11.2022.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Punjab National Bank, (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.30,16,485.90p with interest against Sh. Ranjit Singh and another (defendants).

¶17

Bank’s case is that on 26.10.2016, it had granted a KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs to defendants for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @8.75% per annum with half yearly rests. On 04.11.2022, a sum of Rs.30,16,485.90p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 15.12.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not

¶19

¶20

put in appearance. Vide order dated 20.09.2023, they were proceeded_ex_ parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Kmiti Lal, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11.
5. 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 of
Rs.20.00 Lacs and on 04.11.2022, a sum of Rs.30,16,485.90p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.30,16,485.90p (Rupees Thirty Lacs Sixteen Thousand Four Hundred
Eighty Five and Paisa Ninety Only) with interest @8.75% per annum with half yearly rests from 04.11.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and
several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully
detailed in para No.3(A) of the application as well as from the personal
movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
20.12.2024,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgage land 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: 21.11.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh Pankaj

Punjab National Bank v. Mr. Ranjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Mr. Ranjit 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

Hdfc Bank versus Harikantra Sukru Kiran Kumar Alias Kiran Kumar H S

Hdfc Bank versus Shri Ramandeep Singh

Idbi Bank versus Shri Jarnail Singh

Haridas Narayana pillai versus Gic Housing Finance Ltd.

Ms Sunrise International through Its Proprietor Mr Ujjwal So Vijay Multani versus Union Bank of India

Soumya Yousuf versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited