Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Harjinder Singh

DRT12 Sept 2024OA/339/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of a loan of Rs.20.75 lakhs against the respondent borrower. The court granted a uniform simple interest rate of 8% p.a. and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs.20,75,439.15 plus future simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date until realization.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.339/2023 PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.03.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 12.09.2024

¶5

Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head Office at Bank of India Star House, C-5, “G” Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and having its Zonal officer at Surya Kiran Complex, 1^st Floor, Phase-II, The Mall, near Rakh Bagh, Civil Lines, Ludhaina and amongst various branches having its branch at 26-L, South City, Ayali Khurd, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, through its duly constituted attorney and authorized officer of plaintiff bank Sh. Simar Preet Singh.

¶6

……..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Harjinder Singh S/o Sh. Ishar Singh, R/o H.No.102, Village Kot

¶9

Mana, Tehsil Jagraon and District Ludhiana.

¶10

….……Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. T.S. Ratta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Mouhit K Goel, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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 defendants for recovery of Rs.20,75,439.15 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine And Paisa Fifteen Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Simar Preet Singh, Authorized Officer o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 04.02.2016, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶15

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.3.00 Lacs and OD Limit of Rs.9.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 22.05.2017, which is Annexures A3 to this OA.

¶17

The applicant sanctioned the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.3.00 Lacs and OD Limit of Rs.9.00 Lacs vide Credit Sanction Letter dated 25.05.2017, which are Annexures A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶18

Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 24K-18M situated at Village Bhundri I, H.B. No.16, Sub Tehsil Sidhwan Bet Tehsil Jagroan and District Ludhiana vide Declaration under Section 4(1) and Jamabandi for the year 2011-2012 along with their Translations , which are Annexures A18 & A19 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed:-Legal Opinion dated 18.05.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note, Declaration by Borrower, Hypothecation cum Loan Agreement, Declaration by Borrower (L-515), Letter of Undertaking & Authority & MCLR Agreement for KCC Limit and all dated 31.05.2017, which are Annexures A5 to A10 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Debt For KCC Limit dated 28.05.2020, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note (L-434), Declaration by Borrower(L-516), Declaration by Borrower (L-515), Letter of Undertaking & Authority & MCLR Agreement for OD Limit and all dated 31.05.2017, which are Annexures A12 to A16 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Debt for OD Limit dated 28.05.2020, which is Annexure A17 to this OA and Statement of Accounts, which are Annexures A20 & A21 to this OA; Memorandum of Interest, which is Annexure A22 to this OA.

¶20

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.20,75,439.15, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but he did not repay the outstanding amount,

¶21

¶22

therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 03.08.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Simar Preet Singh, Authorized Officer, Bank of India has been filed. 8. 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 had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A22 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendant failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.20,75,439.15p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine And Paisa Fifteen Only) along with interest from the defendant, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of both the accounts.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @13.20%p.a. for KCC Limit and interest @10.80%p.a. for OD Limit from 06.03.2023 the date of institution of this application till actual realization.

¶24

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

¶25

¶26

of the defendant, 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 accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.20,75,439.15 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Nine And Paisa Fifteen 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 shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendant in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶28

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 08.10.2024.

¶30

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶31

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶32

Dated: 12.09.2024

¶33

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

Bank of India v. Sh. Harjinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Harjinder 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

Indian Bank versus Surmukh Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sarabjit Kaur and Another

Union Bank of India versus Mitanshu Garg

Punjab National Bank versus Geeta Rani

Punjab National Bank versus Surjit Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Namho Fashion and Another