Allowed

Bank of India v. Jagtar Singh and Another

DRT20 Nov 2024OA/781/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant's application for recovery of Rs. 57,80,362. It directed the defendants to pay the principal amount plus simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing and permitted recovery via sale of mortgaged properties or attachment of assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 57,80,362 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date and liberty to enforce via sale of mortgaged properties or attachment of assets.

Bank of India versus Jagtar Singh and Another — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.781/2023 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.06.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 20.11.2024

¶5

Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) act no. V of 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House”, C-5, Block-G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and branch office amongst other places at Nawanshahr, District S.B.S. Nagar (Punjab) through its duly Constituted Attorney Sh. Anil Kumar Gera, presently posted as Chief Manager, at Sutlej Market branch, Jalandhar (Punjab).

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Jagtar Singh S/o Sh. Manna Singh, R/o Village Majhur, Tehsil Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar, Punjab-144515

¶9

Sh. Dilbagh Singh S/o Sh. Tara Singh, R/o Village Majhur, Tehsil Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar, Punjab-144515

¶10

….……Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Anil Malhotra, Advocate proxy for Ms. Meena Malhotra, Advocate for the applicant 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.57,80,362.00 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Eighty Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Anil Kumar Gera, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 18.05.2018, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants no.1 & 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.36.00

¶16

¶17

Lacs vide Application for grant of credit facilities dated 12.09.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit of Rs.36.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 23.09.2013, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 22K-18M situated at Village Majhur, Tehsil Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar (Punjab) vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing v asika No.2372 dated 1 9.09.2013 along with its Translations, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Documents executed:- Demand Promissory Note, bearer Letter, Agreement of Hypothecation, Consolidated stamped Undertaking/ Agreement, Miscellaneous Undertakings/Declarations, Deed of Guarantee all dated 23.09.2013, which are Annexures A5 to A11 to this OA; Acknowledgments of Debt dated 31.05.2016, 21.11.2017, 09.03.2020 and 23.02.2023, which are Annexures A12 to A14 & A16 to this OA; MCLR Agreement dated 08.06.2020, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.05.2023 along with its translations and postal Receipts, which are Annexures A17 to A19 to this OA and Statement of Account along with statement of uncharged interest, duly certified under Banker’s Books Evidence Act, 1891 which is Annexure A20 to this OA.

¶19

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.57,80,362.00, 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 14.11.2024.

¶20

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Anil Kumar Gera, Chief Manager, Bank of India h as been filed.

¶22

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶23

It was argued by learned proxy counsel 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 A20 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant 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 applicant. 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 is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.57,80,362.00 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Eighty Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty Two 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.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.60%p.a. with half yearly rests from 27.04.2023 till the realization.

¶25

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 @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.

¶26

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.57,80,362.00 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Eighty Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty Two 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 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.

¶28

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 17.12.2024.

¶31

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.

¶32

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶33

Dated: 20.11.2024

¶34

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

Bank of India v. Jagtar Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Jagtar 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

Punjab National Bank versus Babu Singh and Others

Canara Bank versus Ranjeet Singh

Union Bank of India versus M/S Malik Electricals and Others

Bank of India versus Davinder Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Rawail Kaur Alias Rawel and Another

Indian Bank versus Bujha Singh and Others