Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh. Jeet Singh

DRT24 Feb 2025OA/1245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of Rs.36,96,040.30 plus interest against the legal heir of a deceased borrower. The Tribunal modified the interest rate to 8% per annum and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.36,96,040.30 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing OA; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Canara Bank versus Sh. Jeet Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1245/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.10.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 24.02.2025

¶6

Canara Bank, a body corporate and nationalized Bank under the Provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970 with its Head Office at JC Road, Bangalore, and amongst other a Branch Office at Hadiabad Tehsil Phagwara, District Kapurthala Punjab through its Principal Officer General attorney and Senior Manager Sh. Satish Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Jeet Singh S/o Sh. Ujagar Singh since deceased survived by following legal heirs:

¶10

a. Sh. Mohinder Singh, Son. (Also defendant no.2) R/o of Hadiabad Near Saint Soldier School, Mohallla Greenland, Tehsil Phagwara, District Kapurthala Punjab.

¶11

b. Sh. Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Jeet Singh R/o of Hadiabad, Near Saint Soldier School, Mohallla Greenland, Tehsil Phagwara, District Kapurthala Punjab.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Anil Johar, Advocate for the applicant Defendant is ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under

¶17

Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.36,96,040.30p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Ninety Six Thousand Forty & Thirty Paisa Only Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Satish Kumar, General attorney and senior manager of the

¶18

¶19

applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 31.12.2016, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 (since deceased) had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 31.12.2016, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 31.12.2016, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant no.1(since deceased) had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. total land measuring 57 Kanal 10Marla situated at Village Dhanduha, Hadbast no.57, Tehsil Banga, District S.B.S. Nagar vide Declaration under section 4(1) dated 04.11.2016, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Documents executed:- Agreement and Deed of Hypothecation for KCC Limit; Letter of Guarantee accompanied by guarantee covering letter both dated 31.12.2016, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA; Letter of acknowledgement of debt & Security dated 10.01.2019 & 21.10.2021, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA; Notice dated 15.05.2024, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and Statement of Accounts duly Certified, which is Annexure A10 to 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.36,96,040.30p, which is recoverable and the defendant was 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 legal heir of deceased defendant no.1 i.e. defendant no.2 was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte on 05.02.2025.

¶22

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Satish Kumar, General attorney and senior manager, Canara Bank 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, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no.1(since deceased) and defendant no.2 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 defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant no.1(since deceased) and defendant no.2 was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.36,96,040.30p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Ninety Six Thousand Forty & Thirty Paisa Only Only) along with interest from the defendant no.2 (also the legal heir of defendant no.1), from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.80%p.a. plus penal interest @2.00%p.a. from with half yearly rests from 01.10.2024 till the realization.

¶25

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 defendant, 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

¶26

¶27

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 defendant no.2 (also the legal heir of defendant no.1) is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.36,96,040.30p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Ninety Six Thousand Forty & Thirty Paisa Only Only). 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 defendant no.2 (also the legal heir of defendant no.1) in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant no.2 (also the legal heir of defendant no.1). The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶29

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 27.03.2025.

¶32

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant no.2 through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶33

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶34

Dated: 24.02.2025

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶36

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Sh. Jeet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh. Jeet Singh

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 M/S Saluja Enterprises

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Darshan Singh

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Amandeep Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Ajay Kumar Maikap

Canara Bank versus Sh. Ranjit Singh Alias Ranjeet Singh

Canara Bank versus Sh.Ramesh Kumar