Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Balwant Singh and Others

DRT24 Oct 2024OA/470/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of RS.32,26,247.14p plus interest rejected by the court at 12-16% and fixed it uniformly at 8%. The Recovery Certificate was issued under the RDDBFI Act and SARFAESI Act provisions. Defendants were absent.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay RS.32,26,247.14p plus simple interest at 8% p.a. Recovery Certificate issued; sale of mortgaged properties authorized if dues remain unsatisfied.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Balwant Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.470/2024 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.02.2024

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 24.10.2024

¶5

HDFC Bank Limited, having its Registered Office at: Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumabai-400013, having its branch office at: Giddarbaha, Punjab. Also at: HDFC Bank House, Plot No.-15, Sector 101, Alpha, IT City, Mohali through its Authorized Representative Sh. Dinesh Kumar

¶6

……..Applicant Versus

¶7

Sh. Balwant Singh S/o Sh. Niranjan Singh, R/o Pind Mallan Gidderbaha, Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab-152031

¶8

Sh. Babbal Singh S/o Sh. Balwant Singh, R/o Pind Mallan Gidderbaha, Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab-152031

¶9

Sh. Gulab Singh S/o Sh. Gamdur Singh, R/o Pind Mallan Gidderbaha, Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab-152031

¶10

….……Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Amit Rishi, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.32,26,247.14p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Paisa Fourteen only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized Representative of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution dated 30.10.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Cash Credit Limit (KCC) of Rs.19.14 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.5.63 Lacs vide Loan applications

¶16

¶17

dated 07.01.2015 and again approached the applicant for enhancement of existing KCC Limit to Rs.22.92 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 10.08.2017, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit (KCC) of Rs.19.10 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 5.60 Lacs. Further, applicant sanctioned the enhancement of KCC to Rs. 19.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 13.01.2015 and 16.08.2017, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

Defendants No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 44K situated at Village Mallan-1, Hadbast no.81, Tehsil Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib (Punjab) vide Declaration under section 4 (1) bearing vasika no.447 dated 2 7.01.2015 along with its Translations, which is Annexure A11 to this OA. Documents executed:- Agreement for Cash Credit, Agreement for Term Loan, Demand Promissory Notes all dated 27.01.2015, which are Annexures A6 to A9 to this OA; Agreement for Cash Credit dated 17.08.2017, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Title Search Report, as per Advocate report dated 27.01.2015, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Addendum-cum-Undertaking dated 10.08.2017, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Demand Notice dated 28.10.2023 along with postal Receipts, which is Annexure A14 to this OA and Account Statements (KCC & Term Loan) along with Certificate under Bankers Book of Evidence, which are Annexures A15 & A16 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.32,26,247.14p, which is recoverable and the defendants 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.

¶20

¶21

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 21.10.2024.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized Representative, HDFC Bank Limited h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned 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 A16 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.32,26,247.14p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Paisa Fourteen 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.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. in KCC and @16.00%p.a. in Term Loan along with Penal Interest @16.00%p.a. in both with half yearly rests from 26.10.2023 till the 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 of the defendants, 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

¶25

¶26

just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.32,26,247.14p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven and Paisa Fourteen only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts 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. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 05.11.2024. 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: 24.10.2024

¶27

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

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Balwant Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Balwant 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

Indian Bank versus Sohan Lal and Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Bombay Crockery House and Others

Union Bank of India versus M/S Connecting World Trade Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Indian Bank versus Harnek Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Kulwinder Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sukhdev Kaur and Another