Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Skyline Solar Private Limited and Another

DRT12 Feb 2025OA/1094/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I Chandigarh allowed an Original Application under Section 19 of the RDBFI Act filed by HDFC Bank against two defendants for recovery of Rs. 22,56,871.78p. The Tribunal held the defendants liable jointly and severally and issued a Recovery Certificate, adjusting the interest rate to 8.00%p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,56,871.78p with cost and simple interest at 8.00%p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; parties to appear before Recovery Officer.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Skyline Solar Private Limited and… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1094/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 30.08.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 12.02.2025

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, having its Registered Office at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel- (West), Mumbai- 400013 and also at: Plot No.1-15, Sector 101, ALPHA IT City, SAS Nagar (Mohali) through its authorized representative, Ms. Khushpreet Bains.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Skyline Solar Private Limited through its Director Sh. Vikramjit Singh, C/o SCO 183 First Sector 7C Chandigarh-160017.

¶10

Sh. Vikramjit Singh, S/o Sh. Kuldip Singh, R/o H.No.50, Punjab Judges and Officer Enclave, Sector 77, Sohana, SAS Nagar (Mohali).

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Ms. Dipti Toni, counsel for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.22,56,871.78p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Fifty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy One and Paise Seventy Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Khushpreet Bains, Authorised Representative of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 09.01.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for the grant of Vehicle Loan of

¶17

¶18

Rs.32.00 Lacs vide Loan applications dated 10.05.2018, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant Bank sanctioned the Vehicle Loan of Rs.30.00 Lacs to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants had hypothecated his movable properties i.e. Vehicle namely “FORD ENDEAVOUR 3.2L TITANIUM 4” bearing Registration no.CH01BS6245, Engine no.JL64939 and Chassis no.MAJAXXMRWAJL64939 to this OA vide RC Details filed in compliance of order dated 21.08.2024 vide diary no.1739 dated 04.02.2025 to this OA. Documents executed:- Agreements for Loan and Guarantee & Irrevocable Power of Attorney both dated 21.05.2018, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Legal notice dated 18.08.2023, which is Annexure A7 to this OA and Postal receipts dated 21.08.2023, which are Annexures A8 & A9 to this OA.

¶20

The loan account became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was adebit of Rs.22,56,871.78p, which is recoverable and the defendants was 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. 6. 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 15.07.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Khushpreet Bains, Authorized Representative, HDFC Bank Limited h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted,

¶21

¶22

the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank 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 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 bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.22,56,871.78p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Fifty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy One and Paise Seventy Eight 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 bank in relief clause has claimed interest @8.76%p.a. from 18.08.2023 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 account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amounts ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.22,56,871.78p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Fifty Six Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy One and Paise Seventy Eight Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in

¶25

¶26

the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amounts. Accordingly, the applicant bank 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 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 13.03.2025. 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: 12.02.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Skyline Solar Private Limited and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Skyline Solar Private Limited 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

Indian Bank versus Messrs Kaura Cold Storage and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Pargat Singh and Others

Axis Bank Limited versus M/S Sidhi Vinayak Agencies and Others

Union Bank of India versus M/S Malhotra Cycle Industries and Another

Indian Bank versus Jagdish Singh and Another

Indian Bank versus Daljit Singh and Others