Allowed

Canara Bank v. Gurjit Singh

DRT24 Sept 2024OA/802/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Canara Bank's application for recovery of Rs.25,17,263/- with interest against Gurjit Singh, who was present ex parte, based on proof of advanced loan and mortgage security, directing issuance of Recovery Certificate and distribution of sale proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.25,17,263/- with interest @12.50% p.a. from 31.03.2022; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale of mortgaged property and standing crops ordered.

Canara Bank versus Gurjit Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 802 of 2022 Date of Institution: 31.03.2022 Date of Decision: 24.09.2024

¶4

Canara Bank, Pachranga, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Gurjit Singh S/o Balwinder Singh, R/o Village Dode, PO Mustafapur, Tehsil And District Jalandhar, Punjab-144801.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Ms. Jeevika, proxy counsel for Sh. Neeraj Madaan, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- Ex parte.

¶11

OA for the Recovery of Rs.25,17,263/- with interest @12.50% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 31.03.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Canara Bank (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.25,17,263/- with interest against Gurjit Singh(defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 03.04.2008, it had granted KCC Limit of Rs.3.50 lacs to defendant for agricultural purpose. Thereafter, at the request of defendant, on 22.03.2017, the said KCC Limit was enhanced from Rs.3.50 lacs to Rs.15.00 lacs. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.90% per annum with half yearly rests. On 30.09.2021, a sum of Rs.25,17,263/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶14

¶15

On 19.05.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 07.02.2023, he was proceeded ex parte .

¶16

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Kapil Dev Ghai, Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-19. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.15.00 lacs and on 30.09.2021, a sum of Rs.25,17,263/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.25,17,263/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventeen Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Three Only) with interest @12.50% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of filing the present application i.e. 31.03.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 24.10.2024 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 24.09.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Gurjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Gurjit 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

Hanif Ismail Gujarati versus Union Bank of India

Punjab National Bank versus Registered Agreement for Sale

Mrs Nirmala Kishor Agrawal Prop Ms Shakambari Collection versus Nagpur Nagarik Sahakari Bank Limited

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Shri Salasar Balaji Traders

State Bank of India versus Sh. Hardial Singh @ Dial Singh

Ms Hussain Enterprises versus Central Bank of India