Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh. Balwinder Singh

DRT20 Jan 2024OA/612/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte ex-party Original Application for recovery of an agricultural loan, the Tribunal allowed the application, declared the defendant liable to pay the outstanding amount with interest at 10% p.a., and authorized recovery from mortgaged properties or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.27,06,194.75 with simple interest at 10% p.a. from the filing date of the OA until realization.

Canara Bank versus Sh. Balwinder Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.612/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 08.04.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 20.01.2024

¶6

Canara Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at 112, J.C. Road, Bangalore and one of its Branch Office situated at Machhiwara, District Ludhiana, Punjab being represented through its Authorized Person/General Power of Attorney holder, Ms. Anupriya

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Balwinder Singh S/o Sh. Ranvijay Singh, R/o Village Jadhwal, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab-141115 (Borrower)

¶9

………Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Munish Yadav, counsel for the applicant Defendant is ex-parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

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 defendant for recovery of Rs.27,06,194.75p (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Six Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Seventy Five Paisa only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Anupriya, Branch Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 19.01.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶14

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Agriculture Loan of Rs.19.50 Lacs

¶15

¶16

vide Application-cum-Appraisal Form dated 25.03.2019, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶17

The applicant Bank sanctioned the Agriculture Loan i.e. Working capital limit of Rs.19.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 09.04.2019, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶18

Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 44 Kanal 7-1/4 Marlas situated at Village Jodhwal, H.B. No.21, Sub-Tehsil Machhiwara, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 08.04.2019, which is Annexure A4 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed:- Agreement and deed of hypothecation dated 09.04.2019, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Acknowledgment of debt dated 05.02.2022, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Legal notices dated 20.12.2021 and 21.03.2022, which are Annexures A7 and A8 to this OA and Statement of account alongwith the certificate, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶20

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.27,06,194.75p, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶21

The defendant was served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 14.09.2023.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Anupriya, Branch Manager, Canara Bank has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶23

It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted,

¶24

¶25

the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan 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 bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.27,06,194.75p (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Six Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Seventy Five Paisa only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @12.15%p.a. from 08.04.2022 till the realization.

¶27

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 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 @10.00%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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.27,06,194.75p (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Six Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Seventy Five Paisa only) with costs, current and future simple interest @10.00%p.a. in the loan account from the

¶29

¶30

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 defendant 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 defendant. 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 08.02.2024. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank 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. Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal. Dated: 20.01.2024 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Sh. Balwinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh. Balwinder 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 Sh. Baldev Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Karaj Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Joginder Singh

Bank of India versus M/s Sheel Auto Industries Pvt. Ltd.

H.D.F.C Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Rakbir Singh