Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Jaskaran Singh and Others

DRT12 Nov 2024OA/985/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant's application for recovery of Rs. 29.38 Lakhs. The Tribunal held the defendants liable to pay the principal amount along with a uniform simple interest of 8% p.a., directing execution through sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 29,38,901 along with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the filing date till realization, enforceable via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Jaskaran Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.985/2022 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 18.06.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 12.11.2024

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., a banking company, carrying on the banking business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senpati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 and branch office amongst other places one at Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab through Sh. Parampreet Singh Kahlon, Assistant Manager holder of an Attorney from the applicant.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Jaskaran Singh S/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, R/o village Bodiwala, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab-151210

¶9

Sh. Gurcharan Singh S/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, R/o village Bodiwala, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab-151210

¶10

Smt. Jaswinder Kaur W/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, R/o village Bodiwala, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab-151210

¶11

Sh. Balkaran Singh S/o Sh. Jangir Singh, R/o Village Bodiwala Kharak Singh, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab151210

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

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

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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.29,38,901.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Thirty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and One only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Parampreet Singh Kahlon, Assistant Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide

¶17

¶18

Power of Attorney dated 16.12.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of Agriculture Cash Credit Limit of Rs.12.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Application Form for Agricultural Loan dated 04.06.2011, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Agriculture Cash Credit Limit of Rs.12.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 4.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letters by applicant and acceptance of credit facilities dated 08.06.2011, which are Annexures A3 & A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendants No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 64K-0M situated at Village Bodiwala Kharak Singh, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib (Punjab) vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing v asika No.1011 dated 13.06.2011 and Mutation/Rapat Certificate dated 14.06.2011 along with their Translations, which are Annexures A11 to A14 to this OA. Documents executed:- Agreement for Term Loan cum Guarantee cum Hypothecation, Agreement for Overdraft/cash credit cum Guarantee cum Hypothecation, Demand Promissory Notes and Letters of Continuity all dated 13.06.2011, which are Annexures A5 to A10 to this OA; Notice dated 21.03.2022 along with postal Receipts, which are Annexures A15 to A19 to this OA and Statement of loan accounts along with Certificate regarding the Computer System and the genuineness of the statement of Accounts being prepared through computer system, which are Annexures A20 & A21 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.29,38,901.00, 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.

¶21

¶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 08.11.2024.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Parampreet Singh Kahlon, Assistant Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. h as been filed.

¶24

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶25

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 A21 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.29,38,901.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Thirty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and 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.

¶26

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 Cash Credit and @10.55%p.a. in Term Loan with half yearly rest in both from 02.10.2021 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 @8.00%p.a. in

¶28

¶29

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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.29,38,901.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Thirty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and 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.

¶31

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 04.12.2024.

¶33

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.

¶34

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 12.11.2024

¶35

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

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Jaskaran Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Jaskaran 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

Axis Bank Limited versus Tarlochan Singh and Others

Axis Bank Limited versus Ajmer Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Himachal Salt Suppliers and Others

Central Bank of India versus Jagjeet Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sukhraj Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Gurpal Singh