Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Rajeshwar Verma and Another

DRT24 Apr 2025OA/1087/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant's application to recover Rs.32.63 Lakhs advanced as a property term loan. The court ruled the defendants liable to pay the principal amount plus simple interest at 8% per annum, granting relief through a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.32,63,544.44 plus simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date until realization.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Rajeshwar Verma and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1087/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 20.08.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 24.04.2025

¶6

Union Bank of India having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021, having its Branch Office at Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Andra Bank), SCO 357, Sector-44D, Chandigarh-160047, through its Attorney Holder Sh. Satish Kumar Jha, Chief Manager at Union Bank of India, Stressed asset management branch SCO 137-138, Sector 8C, Chandigarh-160008.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Rajeshwar Verma S/o Sh. Gopal Verma R/o House no. 213, Ravindra Enclave, Phase–1, Baltanta, Zirakpur, SAS Nagar, Punjab-140603.

¶10

Second Address :-House no. 70, Small Flats, Dhanas, Chandigarh-160014.

¶11

Smt. Urmila Devi W/o Sh. Rajeshwar Verma R/o House no. 213, Ravindra Enclave, Phase–1, Baltanta, Zirakpur, SAS Nagar, Punjab-140603. Second Address :-House no. 70, Small Flats, Dhanas, Chandigarh-160014.

¶12

…….Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Advocate for the applicant None for Defendants

¶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.32,63,544.44p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Sixty Three Thousand Five Hundred Forty Four and Paise Forty Four Only). The Original

¶17

2 OA NO.1087/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJESHWAR VERMA AND ANOTHER

¶18

Application has been filed through Sh. Satish Kumar Jha, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 15.03.2003, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for grant of Property Term Loan of Rs.24.00 Lacs.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned Property Term Loan of Rs.24.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 07.02.2019, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Residential Property measuring 100 Sq. yards, bearing House no. 213, Ravindra Enclave, Phase 1, Village Bartana, District SAS Nagar, Punjab vide Equitable Mortgage of Sale Deed bearing vasika no.2610 dated 24.07.2022 and Jamabandi with mutation along with their translation, which are Annexures A6, A6A, A7 and A7A to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed:- Composite Agreement, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Undertakings and Equitable Mortgage all dated 14.02.2019, which are Annexures A3 to A5 and A8 to this OA; Title search Report dated 04.02.2019, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Valuatin Report dated 30.01.2019, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; CERSAI qua the aforesaid property under reference dated 23.02.2023, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Simple Debt Balance and Security Confirmation Letter dated 22.06.2022 and 28.12.2022, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Demand Notice u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act 2002 along with Postal receipts dated 19.03.2024, which is Annexure A13 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A14 (colly) to this OA.

¶23

3 OA NO.1087/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJESHWAR VERMA AND ANOTHER

¶24

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.32,63,544.44p, 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.

¶25

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal. Power of Attorney of Sh. V.K. Dewan and Sh. B B bagga, Advocates was filed on behalf of defendants on 08.01.2025 vide diary no.449 but did not filed WS within stipulated period. Therefore, opportunity to file WS was closed and their defense was struck of on 07.04.2025.

¶26

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Satish Kumar Jha, Chief Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments of Ld. counsel for applicant. None appeared on behalf of defendants for arguments. Perused record. 9. 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 A14(colly) 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 bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans 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.32,63,544.44p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Sixty Three Thousand Five Hundred Forty Four and Paise Forty Four Only) along with interest from the

¶27

4 OA NO.1087/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJESHWAR VERMA AND ANOTHER

¶28

defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶29

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.30%p.a. with monthly rests from 01.07.2024 till the realization.

¶30

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 @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶31

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.32,63,544.44p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Sixty Three Thousand Five Hundred Forty Four and Paise Forty Four Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of .

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

5 OA NO.1087/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJESHWAR VERMA AND ANOTHER

¶34

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.05.2025.

¶35

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.

¶36

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶37

Dated: 24.04.2025

¶38

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

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Rajeshwar Verma and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Rajeshwar Verma 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

Union Bank of India versus Messrs v R Fashion and Others

South Indian Bank Ltd. versus Messrs a S Constructions and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Eeshaan Traders

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jagvir Singh

Union Bank of India versus M/S Saggu Industries and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Late Sh. Gulzar Singh and Others