Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Davinder Pal Singh

DRT9 Aug 2024OA/651/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's application for recovery of Rs. 50,44,827 from borrowers and guarantors. The court upheld liability but reduced interest from 10.45% to 8% per annum. A Recovery Certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs. 50,44,827 with 8% p. a. interest; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce sale of assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.651/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.04.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 09.08.2024

¶6

Bank of India, a Body Corporate Constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House” C-5, Block-G, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and a Branch Office amongst other places, at Kapurthala (Punjab), through its duly constituted attorney Sh. Anil Kumar Gera, presently posted as Chief Manager, at Sutlej Market Branch, Jalandhar (Punjab).

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Davinder Pal Singh S/o Sh. Malkiat Singh, R/o Vill. Dariawal, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala (Punjab)-144626. (CoBorrower and legal heir of borrower, Sh. Malkiat Singh, being son)

¶10

Sh. Raminder Pal Singh S/o Sh. Malkiat Singh, R/o Vill. Dariawal, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala (Punjab)-144626. (Legal heir of borrower, Sh. Malkiat Singh, being son)

¶11

Smt. Bhajan Kaur W/o Sh. Malkiat Singh, R/o Vill. Dariawal, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala (Punjab)-144626. (Legal heir of borrower, Sh. Malkiat Singh, being wife)

¶12

Sh. Narinder Singh, S/o Sh. Dial Singh, R/o Village Majahadpur,

¶13

Distt. Kapurthala, Punjab-144620 (Guarantor)

¶14

….……Defendants

¶15

Advocates:

¶16

Argued by Sh. Anil Malhotra, Advocate proxy for Ms. Meena Malhotra, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank

¶19

under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial

¶20

¶21

Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.50,44,827.00 (Rupees Fifty Lacs Forty Four Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Anil Kumar Gera, Chief Manager o f the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Notarized photocopy of Power of Attorney dated 18.05.2018, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 & Late. Sh. Malkiat Singh had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 26.12.2011, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 31.05.2012, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Late. Sh. Malkiat Singh had mortgaged his immovable property i.e., land measuring 40K-05M situated at Village Sabuwal, H.B. No.51, Tehsil Sultanpur Lodhi, Distt. Kapurthala vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing vasika no.157 dated 23.05.2012 along with its Translation, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Documents executed:-Demand Promissory Note, Bearer Letter, Agreement of loan cum hypothecation of standing crops, Multipurpose stamp Undertaking, Misc. Declarations And Deed of Guarantee all dated 31.05.2012, which are Annexures A5 to A11 to this OA; Acknowledgment of Debts dated 19.02.2015, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Death certificate, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Acknowledgment of Debts dated 09.01.2018 & 26.02.2020, which are Annexures A14 & A15 to this OA; Legal notice dated 22.07.2021 & 23.07.2021 with postal receipts, which are Annexures A16 to A20 to this OA; Recall notices dated 28.03.2023 with postal receipts, which are Annexures A21 to A25 to this OA and Statement of account along with statement of uncharged interest, duly certified under Banker’s Book Evidence Act,1891, which is Annexure A26 to this OA.

¶23

¶24

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.50,44,827.00, 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. 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 30.05.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Anil Kumar Gera, Chief Manager, Bank of India h as 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 bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A26 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.50,44,827.00 (Rupees Fifty Lacs Forty Four Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Seven 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.

¶25

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. from 19.03.2023 till the realization. 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

¶26

¶27

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 @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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.50,44,827.00 (Rupees Fifty Lacs Forty Four Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Seven 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 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.

¶29

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 02.09.2024.

¶32

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.

¶33

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal.

¶34

Dated: 09.08.2024

¶35

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

Bank of India v. Sh. Davinder Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Davinder Pal 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

Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited versus Sukhpal Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jaswant Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Gurbir Kaur

Bank of Baroda versus Late Sh. Kewal Krishan

Punjab National Bank versus Jagjit Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Karnail Singh