Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj

DRT18 Jan 2024OA/88/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs.23,53,399 due from borrowers under an NPA housing loan. The court directed the defendants to pay the principal sum plus simple interest at 9.45% p.a. The bank may recover dues by selling mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.23,53,399 plus uniform simple interest at 9.45% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce against mortgaged or personal assets.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.88/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 18.01.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 18.01.2024

¶6

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Andhra Bank), body corporate constituted under Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhawan, 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra400021 and having one of its Branch situated at Balraj Complex, Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab through Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kanaujia, Branch Manager

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj S/o Sh. Sawraj Dev, R/o H.No.3042, Rai Sahib Street, District Sangrur, Punjab

¶10

Smt. Geeta Bhardwaj W/o Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj, R/o H.No.3042, Rai Sahib Street, District Sangrur, Punjab Alternative addresses for both the defendants:2^nd Address:- Village Dhingi, Nabha Malerkotla Road, Backside of Manav Resort, Nabha 3^rd Address:- H.No.F-299, Officer Colony, Nankiana Road, Sangrur (Borrowers/Mortgagors) 3. Sh. Sukhminder Kaushal S/o Sh. Roop Chand Kaushal, R/o Thatherian Street, Nabha, District Patiala (Guarantor) ………Defendants Advocates: Argued by Ms. Lovedeep Kaur, counsel proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶11

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.23,53,399.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Nine only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kanaujia, Branch Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 25.10.2014, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶14

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant No.1 and 2 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Housing loan of Rs.15.00 Lacs and further of Rs.2.40 Lacs vide Loan Applications, which are Annexures A2 and A12 to this OA.

¶15

The applicant Bank sanctioned the Housing loan of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 25.06.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and House loan-II of Rs.2.40 Lacs and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶16

Defendant No.1 and 2 had mortgaged their immovable properties through equitable mortgage by deposit of original Title Deeds detailed as below:-

¶17

a) Property measuring 400 Sq. Yards owned by defendant No.1; b) Property measuring 350 Sq. Yards owned by defendant No.2 Both situated at Village Dhingi, Tehsil Nabha, Punjab registered vide Sale Deed Nos.2743 and 2742 dated 06.02.2015 respectively, which are Annexures A8, A8-T, A9 and A9-T to this OA and Memorandum of deposit of title deed dated 25.06.2015, which is Annexure A10 to this OA.

¶18

Documents executed:- I.D. proof of defendants in File 3, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; D.P. note, Housing loan agreement and Agreement of rate of interest all dated 25.06.2015, which are Annexures A5 to A7 to this OA; Consent letter dated 25.06.2015,

¶19

¶20

which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Housing loan agreement and Letter of guarantee both dated 23.05.2016, which are Annexures A13 and A15 to this OA; Letter for entering bank’s lien in revenue record, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Supplementary memorandum of entry of equitable mortgage dated 30.05.2016, which is Annexure A16 to this OA Debit balance confirmation letters dated 25.06.2015, 13.08.2018 and 31.12.2020, which are Annexures A17 to A19 to this OA; Recall notice dated 05.12.2017, which is Annexure A20 to this OA; Legal notice dated 21.06.2019, which is Annexure A21 to this OA; Statements of accounts, which are Annexures A22 and A23 to this OA; Demand notice u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, 2002 dated 22.08.2018, which is Annexure A24 to this OA and Possession notice u/s 13(4) read with rule 8 (1) dated 23.07.2019, which is Annexure A25 to this OA.

¶21

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.23,53,399.00, 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.

¶22

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 11.12.2023.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kanaujia, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India has 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 A25 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant

¶24

¶25

documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans 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 bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,53,399.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Nine 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.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @11.25%p.a. in Housing Loan-I and @9.45%p.a. in Housing Loan-II plus 2.00%p.a. penal interest with monthly rests, in both, from 01.01.2023 till the realization.

¶27

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 @9.45%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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.23,53,399.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Nine only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @9.45%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 bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties

¶29

¶30

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 06.02.2024. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal. Dated: 18.01.2024

¶31

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

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Pardeep Kumar Bhardwaj

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 Sh. Mela Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank, versus Sh.Lakhwinder Singh and Another

Canara Bank versus Messrs Tanmay Fabrics and Anr.

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Karaj Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Baldev Singh

Canara Bank versus Sh. Balwinder Singh