Allowed

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sandeep Singh and Another

DRT29 Nov 2024OA/562/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PTc allowed a recovery application under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act, 1993. The Tribunal upheld the bank's claim for Rs.26.13 lakhs with mortgaged security. Upon exercising discretion regarding interest rates amidst changing market conditions, the Tribunal ordered recovery with 8% p.a. simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.26,12,650 plus 8% p.a. simple interest; issuance of Recovery Certificate; entitlement to sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sandeep Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.562/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 28.03.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.11.2024

¶6

Punjab Gramin Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976, Act No.21, of 1976 having its Head Office, at Kapurthala Road, Kapurthala(Pb) and having its branches at different places including one at Sultanpur Lodhi, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi and District Kapurthala (Pb) through its Constituted Attorney/Manager Sh. Santokh Singh

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

1. Sh. Sandeep Singh Son of Sh. Balwinder Singh resident of Village Saroopwal, P.O. Sultanpur Lodhi, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala (Pb)

¶9

Sh. Sukhdev Singh Son of Sh. Dharam Singh resident of Village Saroopwal, P.O. Sultanpur Lodhi, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala (Pb).

¶10

………. Defendants Advocates: Argued by Sh. Bhushan Bhatia, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex parte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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.26,12,650.00p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twelve Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Santokh Singh, Constituted Attorney/Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 09.01.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶13

¶14

2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of Credit Facilities of Rs.12.00 Lacs (KCC Limit of Rs.11.00 Lacs & Term Loan of Rs.1.00 Lacs) vide Loan Applications dated 22.07.2014 & 10.11.2014, which areAnnexures A2 & A2/1to
this OA.
3. The applicant sanctioned Credit Facilities of Rs.12.00 Lacs (KCC
Limit of Rs.11.00 Lacs & Term Loan of Rs.1.00 Lacs) vide Sanction Letter dated 25.07.2014 & 10.11.2014, which areAnnexures A3 &
A3/1to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.
4. Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e.
total land measuring 17K-00Msituated in Village Saroopwal, Tehsil
Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala vide Registered Mortgage Deed
bearing vasika no.748 dated 01.08.2014,which isAnnexure A5to
this OA.
Documents executed:- Loan Agreement, Guarantee dated 07.08.2014
& 10.11.2017,which areAnnexures A4, A4/1 & A4/2to this OA;
Legal Notice dated 08.06.2014, which isAnnexure A6to this OA; BC
Letter KCC all dated 28.12.2015, 12.05.2016,16.02.2019,05.11.2020,
which areAnnexures A7 to A7/5to this OA and Statements of
Accounts with certificate, which areAnnexure A8 & A8/1to this OA.
5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA
and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both loan accounts there
was a debit of Rs.26,12,650.00p, 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.
6. 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 27.11.2024.
7. In support of the OA, affidavit ofSh. Santokh Singh, Constituted
Attorney/Manager, Punjab Gramin Bank,has been filed.

¶15

¶16

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶17

It was argued by learned counsel through Video

¶18

Conferencing 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 A8 and A8/1 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. 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 is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,12,650.00p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twelve Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of both the accounts.

¶19

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.25%p.a. with yearly rests from 28.03.2023 till the realization.

¶20

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 just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%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.

¶21

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.26,12,650.00p (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twelve Thousand Six

¶22

¶23

Hundred Fifty Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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 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 applicant 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.

¶24

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

¶25

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 04.01.2025.

¶26

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.

¶27

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 29.11.2024

¶28

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

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sandeep Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sandeep 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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sushil Kumar and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sarabhjit Singh and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Messrs Shah Trading Co. and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Gurnam Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Gurcharan Kaur and Another

Indian Bank versus Mohan Singh Gill and Others