Allowed

Uco Bank v. Harman Singh Sohal and Another

DRT4 Jan 2025OA/1030/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by UCO Bank against housing loan defaulters. The court declared defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.54,34,144.09 plus interest @8% p.a. and authorized recovery through sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Order directed defendants to pay Rs.54,34,144.09 with simple interest @8% p.a. and issued Recovery Certificate.

Uco Bank versus Harman Singh Sohal and Another — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1030/2024 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.08.2024

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 04.01.2025

¶5

UCO Bank, a body corporate constituted by and under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 and having its Head Office at 10 BTM Sarini, Kolkata, and a Branch amongst other places at G.T. Road, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana through its Manager Sh. Mukesh Kumar.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Harman Singh Sohal S/o Sh. Gurdeep Singh R/o H.No.247, Street No.9-L, Ishar Singh Nagar Canal Road, Ludhiana (PB)141013.

¶9

2^nd Address: House No. 3585/1, Street No.6, Chet Singh Nagar, Gill Road, Ludhiana (PB)-141001.

¶10

Smt. Narinder Kaur W/o Sh. Harman Singh Sohal R/o H.No.247, Street No.9-L, Ishar Singh Nagar, Canal Road, Ludhiana (PB)-141013.

¶11

2^nd Address: House No. 3585/1, Street No.6, Chet Singh Nagar, Gill Road, Ludhiana (PB)-141001.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Yogesh Kumar, Advocate proxy for Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for 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.54,34,144.09p (Rupees Fifty Four Lacs Thirty Four Thousand One Hundred Forty Four & Nine Paisa only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mukesh Kumar, Manager, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Circular dated 20.07.2012, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

¶18

2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos.1 & 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of Housing Loan of Rs.50.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 01.12.2020, which isAnnexure A2to this OA.
3. The applicant sanctioned the Housing Loan of Rs.50.00 Lacs vide
Copy of Sanction Letter dated 27.11.2020, which isAnnexure A3to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the
defendants.
4. Defendant No. 1 & 2 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. House bearing no.B-XXIX-247/1,measuring 132 sq yardssituated
at Street No.9-L, Ishar Nagar, Canal Road, Ludhiana vide Equitable Mortgage of Sale Deed bearing vasika no.2020-21/103/1/8768 dated
01.01.2021 along with its Translations,which isAnnexure A6to this
OA.
Documents executed:-Copy of demand promissory note, Copy of loan agreement both dated 01.12.2020, which areAnnexures A4 & A5to
this OA; Copy of Confirmation dated 07.01.2024, which isAnnexure
A7to this OA; Copy of CERSAI dated 03.07.2024, which isAnnexure
A8to this OA; Copy of Legal Notice dated 10.04.2024, which is
Annexure A9to this OA; Copy of notice under 13(2) dated 18.04.2024, which isAnnexures A10to this OA; Copy of possession notice dated 02.07.2024, which isAnnexures A11to this OA and Copy of statement
of Accounts along with calculation of interest , Valuation report &
Certificate under bankers Books Evidence, which areAnnexures A12
to A14to this OA.
5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.54,34,144.09p, 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

¶19

¶20

ex-parte on 01.01.2025. Sh. Sachin Sharma, Advocate along with Sh. Virbhan Sharma appeared today for both the defendants and filed an IA no.12/2025 for setting aside ex-parte order dated 01.01.2025. During the course of arguments Sh. Sachin Sharma, advocate prayed for withdrawal of this IA no.12/2025 and same is dismissed as withdrawn. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mukesh Kumar, Manager, UCO Bank, has been filed.

¶21

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶22

It was argued by learned proxy 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 A14 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.54,34,144.09p (Rupees Fifty Four Lacs Thirty Four Thousand One Hundred Forty Four & Nine Paisa only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.75%p.a. with monthly rests from 01.08.2024 till the realization.

¶24

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 the loan

¶25

¶26

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

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.54,34,144.09p (Rupees Fifty Four Lacs Thirty Four Thousand One Hundred Forty Four & Nine Paisa only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account 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.

¶28

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 07.02.2025.

¶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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 04.01.2025.

¶30

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

Uco Bank v. Harman Singh Sohal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Harman Singh Sohal and Another

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

Vinay and Others versus the Hero Housing Finance Limited and Another

Uco Bank versus Tejpal Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Messrs Ifra Fashion and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Khushwinder Singh

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Mandeep Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Parkash Singh and Others