Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Satnam Singh and Others

DRT23 Dec 2024OA/804/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-III, Chandigarh allowed the Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs.25,68,261 against defendants appearing ex-parte. The tribunal directed recovery of the principal amount plus interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 12% p.a., remarking on drastic changes in market rates.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of principal Rs.25,68,261.00 with interest at 8% p.a. and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Satnam Singh and Others — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.804/2022 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.04.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 24.12.2024

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., a banking company, carrying on banking business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under The Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at HDFC bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013, and branch office amongst other places one of Chohla Sahib, District Tarn Taran, through Sh. Harminder Pal Singh, Manager holder of an Attorney from the Applicant.

¶6

……..Applicant Versus

¶7

Sh. Satnam Singh S/o Sh. Virsha Singh, R/o H.No.205, Village Karmuwala, Tehsil & District Tarn Taran-143408.

¶8

Sh. Gurpreet Singh S/o Sh. Virsha Singh, R/o H.No.205, Village Karmuwala, Tehsil & District Tarn Taran-143408.

¶9

Sh. Pargat Singh S/o Sh. Balbir Singh, R/o H.No.205, Village Karmuwala, Tehsil & District Tarn Taran-143408.

¶10

Sh. Baldev Singh S/o Sh. Balbir Singh, R/o H.No.205, Village Karmuwala, Tehsil & District Tarn Taran-143408.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.25,68,261.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Sixty Eight Thousand Two Hundred & Sixty One only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Harminder Pal Singh, Manager holder o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 16.12.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant Cash Credit Limit of Rs.11.70 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.3,57,500.00 vide Loan application form dated 22.08.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs.11.70 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.3.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 05.09.2013, which are Annexures A3 & A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants No.3 & 4 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 41K-16M detailed as : a. land measuring 32K-5 M situated at Village Dhun Dhai Wala, Hadbast No.353, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran b. l and measuring 9K-11M situated at Village Gharka, Hadbast No.352, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no.683 dated 23.09.2013 along with its Translations, which are Annexures A11 & A12 to this OA. Documents executed:- Agreement for Term Loan cum guarantee cum hypothecation, Agreement for Over Draft/Cash Credit cum Guarantee cum Hypothecation, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Continuity all dated 28.09.2013, which are Annexures A5 to A10 to this OA; Notice dated 14.02.2022 along with postal Receipts, which are Annexures A13 to A17 to this OA and Statement of Loan Accounts along with Certificate, which are Annexures A18 & A19 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.25,68,261.00p, 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 20.12.2024.

¶18

¶19

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Harminder Pal Singh, Manager holder, HDFC Bank Ltd., h as been filed.

¶20

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶21

It was argued by learned 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 A19 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.25,68,261.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Sixty Eight Thousand Two Hundred & Sixty One only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶22

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a.in CC Limit & interest @12.00 %p.a.in Term Loan with half yearly rests from 02.10.2021 & 19.01.2022 till the realization.

¶23

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 both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶24

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,68,261.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Sixty Eight Thousand Two Hundred & Sixty One only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts 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.

¶26

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶27

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶28

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 13.02.2025.

¶29

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.

¶30

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 24.12.2024.

¶31

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

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Satnam Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Satnam Singh and Others

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

Messrs Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. versus Messrs Pursharthi Dhaba and Others

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Harbhajan Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Surjit Kaur and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Gurbachan Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Najar Singh and Others

Bank of Baroda versus Messrs Jagdish Singh Contractor and Others