Allowed

Indian Bank v. Smt. Indu Chopra and Another

DRT22 Oct 2025OA/1151/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Indian Bank for recovery of Rs. 29.87 lakhs and future interest. The court ex-parte proceeded against lenders who failed to repay a housing loan. Interest was fixed at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 29,87,355 plus costs and simple interest @8% p.a. Declaration of liability for defendants. Recovery via sale of mortgaged property or attachment of personal assets. Issue of Recovery C

Indian Bank versus Smt. Indu Chopra and Another — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1151/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.08.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.10.2025

¶6

Indian Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 254- 260, Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Royapettah, Chennai, Tamil Nadu-600014 and having its Zonal Office at Ludhiana and amongst other branches a branch at Focal Point Ludhiana through Ms. Hemlata, Branch Manager and duly Constituted and Authorized Signatory.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Smt. Indu Chopra W/o Sh. Sunil Chopra, R/o Flat No. 2/3 Second Floor, GNB Enclave, Jalandhar-1, Punjab.

¶9

Sh. Tarish Chopra S/o Sh. Sunil Chopra, R/o Flat No. 2/3 Second Floor, GNB Enclave, Jalandhar-1, Punjab.

¶10

….……Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Ms. Deepika Mittal, Advocate for the applicant

¶13

Defendants already ex parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.29,87,355.00p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Five only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Hemlata, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Authority letter dated 02.08.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

OA NO.1151/2025 INDIAN BANK VS SMT. INDU CHOPRA AND ANOTHER

¶19

Rs.28.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 10.08.2022, which is Annexures A2 to this OA.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the Housing Loan of Rs.28.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 24.08.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant no.1 had mortgaged her immovable property i.e. Residential property measuring 100 square yards, situated at village Rania HB. No. 266, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide equitable mortgage of sale deed bearing no. 2022-23/103/1/4655 dated 04.11.2022, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; letter dated 16.11.2022 confirming creation of equitable mortgage, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Lien Report dated 22.12.2022, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed: - Term loan agreement dated 25.08.2022, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Legal notice dated 18.07.2024, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Notice dated 18.12.2023 u/s 13 (2) of SARFAESI Act, which are Annexure A9 to this OA and possession notice dated 07.11.2024 u/s 13(4) of SARFAESI Act; Account statement, which is Annexure A11 to this OA.

¶23

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.29,87,355.00p, 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.

¶24

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 16.10.2025.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Hemlata, Branch Manager, Indian Bank, h as been filed.

¶26

Heard ex-arguments and perused record.

¶27

¶28

OA NO.1151/2025 INDIAN BANK VS SMT. INDU CHOPRA AND ANOTHER

¶29

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 A11 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility 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, 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.29,87,355.00p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Five 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.

¶30

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @8.20%p.a. with @2% penal interest with monthly rests, from 20.07.2025 till the realization.

¶31

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 amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶33

¶34

OA NO.1151/2025 INDIAN BANK VS SMT. INDU CHOPRA AND ANOTHER

¶35

Rs.29,87,355.00p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Eighty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Five 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.

¶36

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 01.11.2025.

¶39

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.

¶40

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 22.10.2025

¶41

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

Indian Bank v. Smt. Indu Chopra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Smt. Indu Chopra 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Randhir Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjit Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Aps International and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Baljinder Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Chanan Singh and Others