Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Gurcharan Kaur and Another

DRT29 Nov 2024OA/681/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India against two defendants for recovery of a loan of Rs.21,30,234.00 p along with interest. The defendants did not appear. The Tribunal granted simple interest at 8 p.a. instead of the claimed 11.50 p.a. and ordered recovery via hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs.21,30,234.00 p with costs and simple interest @8 p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Gurcharan Kaur and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.681/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 30.04.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.11.2024

¶6

Union Bank of I ndia, (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) a Body Corporate Constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Central Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 and one of its Branch Offices at SCF-35, New Grain Market, Muktsar, Punjab, through its Branch Manager, Sh. Vinod Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Gurcharan Kaur W/o Sh. Nachhater Singh R/o Village Nandgarh, Sri Muktsar Sahib-152026.

¶9

Sh. Jaswinder Singh S/o Sh. Jagjit Singh R/o Village Nandgarh, Sri Muktsar Sahib-152026.

¶10

….……Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Ravi Mishra, Advocate proxy for Sh. Karan Singla, Advocate for the Applicant (through VC) 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.21,30,234.00p (Rupees Twenty One Lac Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Vinod Kumar, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 06.07.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for the grant of Agriculture KCC Limit of Rs.9.50 Lacs for the 1^st year and to be enhanced 10% every year upto

¶16

¶17

Rs.13.90 Lac for the 5^th years vide Loan application dated 21.05.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned Agriculture KCC Limit of Rs.13.90 Lac vide Credit Sanction Letter, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No.1 had mortgaged her immovable property total land measuring 24Kanal-02Marla situated at Village Nandgarh, H.B.46, Shri Muktsar Sahib vide Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 29.05.2015 and Jamabandi for the year 2010-2011 with its translation, which are Annexures A9 & A10 to this OA. Documents executed:-Hypothecation Agreement, Letter of Undertaking, Mortgage Deed, Mortgage Deed-2, & Deed of Guarantee all dated 30.05.2015, which are Annexures A4 to A8 to this OA; Notice dated 26.04.2023 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A11 to this OA and Statement of Account with certificate, which is Annexure A12 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account there was a debit of Rs.21,30,234.00p, 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 27.11.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Vinod Kumar, Branch Manager , Union Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel through video conferencing 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 Annexure A1 to A12 to this OA, it is

¶18

¶19

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.21,30,234.00p (Rupees Twenty One Lac Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Four 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 account.

¶20

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50%p.a. from 31.03.2023 till the realization.

¶21

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes inappropriate 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 @08.00%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.

¶22

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,30,234.00p (Rupees Twenty One Lac Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Four 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

¶23

¶24

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 03.01.2025. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 29.11.2024 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Gurcharan Kaur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Gurcharan Kaur 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

Indian Bank versus Mohan Singh Gill and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sandeep Singh and Another