Allowed

Canara Bank v. Manjinder Singh

DRT9 Sept 2024OA/219/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs.36,28,265/- and interest against the defaulting defendant proceeded ex parte, authorizing sale of mortgaged property for dues distribution.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.36,28,265/- with interest @12.20% p.a. allowed; issued recovery certificate; directed sale of mortgaged property and crops with proceeds distribution by Recovery Officer.

Canara Bank versus Manjinder 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: 219 of 2023 Date of Institution: 30.12.2022 Date of Decision: 09.09.2024

¶4

Canara Bank, one of its branch office situated at Nakodar Road, Nurmahal, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Manjinder Singh S/o Sh. Kewal Singh, R/o Village Layewal, Ward No.6, Nakodar, District Jalandhar, Punjab-144040.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Sh. Munish Yadav, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- Ex parte .

¶11

OA for the Recovery of Rs.36,28,265/- with interest @12.20% per annum with half yearly rests from 13.12.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Canara 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.36,28,265/- with interest against Manjinder Singh (defendant).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 20.11.2018, it had granted Kisan Credit Card of Rs.25.00 lacs to defendant for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.05% per annum with half yearly rests. On 12.12.2022, a sum of Rs.36,28,265/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

On 14.02.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 24.01.2024, he was proceeded ex parte .

¶16

¶17

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Ms. Nisha Nur, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-9. 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.25.00 lacs and on 12.12.2022, a sum of Rs.36,28,265/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.36,28,265/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Eight Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Five Only) with interest @12.20% per annum with half yearly rests from 13.12.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application, as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 09.10.2024 , 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: 09.09.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Manjinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Manjinder 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

Punjab National Bank versus Ms New Jalan Whole Sale Bazar and others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh Mahinder Singh

Ms Haji Ghulam Mohammad Manzoor Ahmed Lone versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

Ms Jaeco Diesel versus Idfc Bank Limited

Panchali Sunilbhai Madrasi versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Ms S K Traders and Others versus Punjab National Bank