Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Didar Singh and Another

DRT6 Dec 2024OA/251/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of a defaulted KCC loan of approx. Rs. 30.61 Lakhs. The Tribunal adjusted the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a. and directed recovery from mortgaged and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 30,61,280.46 with simple interest at 8% p.a.; Issuance of Recovery Certificate; Enforcement against mortgaged and personal assets.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Didar Singh and Another — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.251/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 11.10.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.12.2024

¶6

Indian Overseas Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (5 of 1970) having its Central Office at 763, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600002 and a Branch Office, amongst other places known as Plot No.1, Block H-5, Adarsh Colony, Rajpura Patiala Punjab, 140401 through Ms. Veenu Pahwa, Manager its Constituted Attorney and Principal Officer.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Didar Singh S/o Shri Mewa Singh R/o Village Khanpur Gandiyan, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala - 140401.

¶10

Shri Sadha Singh S/o Shri Harchand Singh R/o Village Khanpur Gandiyan, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala - 140401.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Mohan Prasad, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pancham Sharma, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.30,61,280.46p (Rupees Thirty Lac Sixty One Thousand Two Hundred Eighty and Forty Six Paisa Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Veenu Pahwa, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 14.12.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 21.09.2012 and further approached for its

¶17

¶18

renewal vide Renewal Application dated 19.06.2020, which is Annexure A4 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 28.09.2012, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and further applicant sanctioned its renewal and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. total land measuring 21B-4B situated at Village Khanpur Gandiyan, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala vide Registered Mortgage deed bearing Vasika no.3722 dated 27.09.2012 along with its translation, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed:- Valuation report dated 13.06.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Letter of Hypothecation and Guarantee Agreement dated 28.09.2012, which are Annexures A5 & A6 to this

¶22

OA; Revival Letter dated 25.09.2015, 28.12.2017, 19.06.2020 and 09.06.2023, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 19.06.2023 with postal receipts, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Statement of Accounts for KCC with Certificate of banker’s book evidence dated 04.10.2023, which is Annexure A10 to this OA.

¶23

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.30,61,280.46p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

The defendants were served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 04.12.2024.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Veenu Pahwa, Manager, Indian Overseas Bank h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record.

¶26

¶27

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 A10 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.30,61,280.46p (Rupees Thirty Lac Sixty One Thousand Two Hundred Eighty and Forty Six 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.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @09.10%p.a. with half yearly rests from 01.09.2023 till the realization.

¶29

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 defendant, quantum of loans 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.30,61,280.46p (Rupees Thirty Lac Sixty One Thousand Two Hundred Eighty and Forty Six Paisa Only) jointly and severally, with

¶30

¶31

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.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 18.01.2025.

¶33

Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant 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.

¶34

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶35

Dated: 06.12.2024

¶36

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

Indian Overseas Bank v. Didar Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Didar 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

Punjab National Bank versus Manjit Singh

Canara Bank versus M/s Shree Balaji Industries and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Manjeet Singh Alias Manjit Singh and Another

Bank of India, versus M/s Uspc Enterprises Hosiery Complex and Another

Bank of Baroda, versus M/s G.S. Broiler Farm and Another

Canara Bank versus M/s Nirmal Industries and Others