Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Vijender Singh Now Deceased

DRT18 Jan 2024OA/985/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-2, Chandigarh allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 32,87,059.31 from the deceased borrower's legal heirs and guarantor ex parte, granting tenders simple interest from the filing date with liability confined to the extent of the inherited estate.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of recovery certificate for Rs. 32,87,059.31 with uniform simple interest @5% per annum from 04.07.2023.

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Vijender Singh Now Deceased — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.985/2023

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.07.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 18^th DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

H.D.F.C. Bank Limited, having its registered office at HDFC Bank

¶6

House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 and also Plot Nos. 1-15, Sector-101, ALPHA IT City, SAS Nagar (Mohali), through its Authorised Representative, Ms Khushpreet Bains

¶7

….. Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Vijender Singh now deceased, through his legal heirs:

¶10

1(i) Smt. Ishwnti w/o Sh. Ram Singh, Near Idea Tower, V.P.O. Sunarian-Kalan, Rohtak (Haryana)-124001

¶11

1(ii) Ms Nikita d/o late Sh. Vijender Singh, Near Idea Tower, V.P.O. Sunarian-Kalan, Rohtak (Haryana)-124001

¶12

1(iii) Ms Nancy d/o late Sh. Vijender Singh, Near Idea Tower, V.P.O. Sunarian-Kalan, Rohtak (Haryana)-124001

¶13

1(iv) Sh. Anshul s/o late Sh. Vijender Singh, Near Idea Tower, V.P.O. Sunarian-Kalan, Rohtak (Haryana)-124001

¶14

Sh. Sandeep s/o Sh. Tara Chand, Bhaini-Bharon (122), Rohtak (Haryana)-124112

¶15

.... Defendants

¶16

Argued by: Ms Dipti Toni, proxy counsel for Sh. Gagandeep Toni, counsel for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 29.08.2023

¶17

OA/985/2023 HDFC BANK VS VIJENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER 2

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendants for recovery of Rs.32,87,059.31/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Eighty Seven Thousand Fifty Nine and Thirty One Paisa Only). It has been filed through Ms Khushpreet Bains, Authorised Representative of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 09.01.2023, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶20

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that defendant No.1 late Sh. Vijender Singh had approached the applicant bank for grant of Commercial Vehicles Loans of Rs. 32,00,000/- and 4,00,000/- vide commercial loan application Form dated 09.02.2022, Annexure-A2 (copy). Defendant No.2 stood as a guarantor for repayment of the loan. 3. The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facilities to the defendants, as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, the defendants executed agreement for loan and guarantee dated 28.02.2022, Annexure-A3 (copy) and irrecoverable power of attorney dated 28.02.2022, Annexure-A4 (copy).

¶22

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facilities were duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to

¶23

OA/985/2023 HDFC BANK VS VIJENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER 3

¶24

maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank leading to the loan accounts becoming irregular and those being classified as NPA. The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide original legal notice dated 24.05.2023, Annexure-A7 (copy) and original postal receipts, Annexures-A8, A9, A10, A11 and A12 (copy), but to no avail.

¶25

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts, a sum Rs.32,87,059.31/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Eighty Seven Thousand Fifty Nine and Thirty One Paisa Only), is recoverable against the defendants as per statements of accounts, duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexures-A5 and A6 (copy).

¶26

Since the defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.

¶27

Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants, thus, the defendants were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 29.08.2023 .

¶28

In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Ms Khushpreet Bains, Manager Legal of the applicant bank was filed.

¶29

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by the learned proxy counsel for the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶30

OA/985/2023 HDFC BANK VS VIJENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER 4

¶31

It was argued by the learned proxy counsel for the applicant bank that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendants for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A12 , it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them. It is further clear that the defendants had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. Sh. Vijender Singh had died, leaving behind defendant Nos. 1(i), 1(ii), 1(iii) and 1(iv) as his legal heirs who have been impleaded as defendants. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.32,87,059.31/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Eighty Seven Thousand Fifty Nine and Thirty One Paisa Only) from the defendants.

¶32

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank has claimed rate of interest @8.15% per annum. In agreement for loan and guarantee dated 28.02.2022, AnnexureA3 (copy), the rate of interest has been mentioned @7.80% per annum.

¶33

This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogatives of mercy and magnanimity are the brightest jewels in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including the Pandemic Covid-19 affecting businesses, purpose of loan, i.e. purchase of

¶34

OA/985/2023 HDFC BANK VS VIJENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER 5

¶35

vehicles make TATA SIGNA 5525 BS VI and 3 AXLE 401 FT, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, death of the borrower and defendant Nos. 1(i), 1(ii), 1(iii) being females, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @5% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶36

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs holding that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.32,87,059.31/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Eighty Seven Thousand Fifty Nine and Thirty One Paisa Only) with current and future simple interest @5% per annum w.e.f. 04.07.2023 , till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joint as well as several. If the dues of the bank remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of hypothecated/personal assets of the defendants. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. However, it is clarified here that there should not be any ambiguity that the liability of the defendants by virtue of their being the legal heirs of the deceased borrower shall remain confined only to the extent of the estate of the deceased borrower if it is inherited by legal heirs and not beyond that. The recovery proceedings shall proceed only after the Recovery Officer is fully satisfied on the aspect of the estate being inherited by the Legal

¶37

OA/985/2023 HDFC BANK VS VIJENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER 6

¶38

Representatives/Heirs and the liability being incurred

¶39

accordingly .

¶40

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 06.03.2024.

¶42

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendants through registered/speed post. This order be uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶43

Pronounced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Vijender Singh Now Deceased

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Sh. Vijender Singh Now Deceased

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

Mr Sushilkumar So Keshav Tiwari versus the Muthoot Home Finance (India) Limited

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Bhagyashri W/O Ashish More

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Maa Vindhyavasini Rice Mill

Punjab National Bank versus Mrs Prerna Pandey

Charan Singh versus Cfm Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd.

Amarjit Singh Sohal versus Ms Cfm Asset Reconstruction Private Limited