Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Sh. Karnail Singh and Another

DRT17 Apr 2025OA/1199/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for Rs. 29,33,412.36 p owed by two borrowers who defaulted on a sanctioned credit facility. The court declared the defendants jointly liable and awarded interest at 8% per annum, issuing a recovery certificate for execution proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.29,33,412.36p plus costs and 8% p.a. simple interest from filing date till realization.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sh. Karnail Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1199/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 26.05.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 17.04.2025

¶6

Indian Overseas Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its Central Office at 762, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002 and amongst others places a branch office at Raikot, Tehsil & Distt. Ludhiana, through its duly constituted attorney Sh. Ram Dass, Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Raikot Branch, Ludhiana.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Karnail Singh S/o Sh. Bachan Singh R/o Village Chinniwal Kalan, Tehsil & Distt. Barnala.

¶10

Sh. Natha Singh S/o Sh. Bachan Singh, R/o Village Chinniwal Kalan, Tehsil & Distt. Barnala.

¶11

………. Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Present by Sh. Sahaj Punj, Advocate proxy for Sh. Sumit Chawla, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.29,33,412.36p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Thirty Three Thousand Four Hundred Twelve and Paise Thirty Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Ram Dass, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 13.01.2009, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

2 OA NO.1199/2022 INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS KARNAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for grant of ACC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 25.02.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned ACC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Credit Sanction Advice (Sanction Letter) dated 07.03.2014, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶18

Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Agricultural Land measuring 20K-07M-2S, situated at Village Chinniwal Kalan B, Hadbast No.35, Tehsil & Distt. Barnala vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 4587 dated 21.02.2014, along with its translation which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed:- Valuation dated 28.02.2014, which is Annexure AA to this OA; Letter of Hypothecation, Guarantee For Cash Credits and Guarantor Statements dated 07.03.2014, which are Annexures A3 to A4 and A7 to this OA; Copy of Jamabandi along with its translation of year 2009-2010, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; D.P Note and D.P. Note Deliver Letter dated 07.03.2014, which are Annexures A8 to A9 to this OA; Legal Notices dated 12.06.2020, which are Annexure A11 to A14 to this OA; Statement of Account with certificate, which are Annexure A15 and A16 to this OA and Revival Letters dated 14.02.2017 and 13.11.2019, which are Annexures A17 and A18 to this OA.

¶20

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.29,33,412.36p, 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.

¶21

3 OA NO.1199/2022 INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS KARNAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶22

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 03.04.2025.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Ram Dass, Manager, Indian Overseas Bank h as been filed.

¶24

Learned proxy counsel present has not advanced any arguments. Perused record.

¶25

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 AA, A1 to A18 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans 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 is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.29,33,412.36p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Thirty Three Thousand Four Hundred Twelve and Paise Thirty Six 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.70%p.a. along with penal interest @2%p.a. with half yearly rests from 13.08.2021 till the realization. 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

¶26

4 OA NO.1199/2022 INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS KARNAIL SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶27

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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.29,33,412.36p (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Thirty Three Thousand Four Hundred Twelve and Paise Thirty Six 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 . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 15.05.2025

¶30

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.

¶31

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 17.04.2025

¶32

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

Indian Overseas Bank v. Sh. Karnail Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Sh. Karnail Singh 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

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Bhavya and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Amar Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sandeep Mittal

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Guru Nanak Agriculture Works and Another

Bank of India versus Sh Dev Raj and another

Indian Bank versus Sh. Sher Singh and Others