Allowed

Bank of India v. Lakhwinder Singh

DRT19 Feb 2025OA/1297/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 26,26,369. The debt was classified as NPA after default on loan facilities granted in 2018. Proceeding ex-parte against undefended respondents, the Tribunal decreed joint and several liability and modified the interest rate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of principal Rs.26,26,369.00 with costs and simple interest @08%p.a. from date of OA till realization via attachment/sale of assets.

Bank of India versus Lakhwinder Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1297/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.11.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.02.2025

¶6

Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act No. V of 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House” C-5, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and Branch Office amongst other places, at Dharamkot, District Moga (Punjab), through its duly constituted attorney Sh. Ajit Dadwal, presently posted as Chief Manager at Moga Branch (Punjab).

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Lakhwinder Singh alias Sh. Lakhvir Singh S/o Sh. Darshan Singh, R/o Village Bajeke, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga (Punjab)-142042.

¶10

Sh. Harnek Singh, S/o Sh. Darshan Singh, R/o Village Bajeke, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga (Punjab)-142042.

¶11

………. Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Anil Malhotra, Advocate proxy for Ms. Meena Malhotra, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) 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.26,26,369.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Ajit Dadwal, Chief Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 22.02.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs and Agriculture Overdraft (AGOD) Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 11.01.2018, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs and Agriculture Overdraft (AGOD) Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 24.01.2018, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. 4. Defendant no.1 mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. land measuring 54K-01M situated in Village Bajeke & Dholewala, H.B. Nos. 244 & 237, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga (Punjab) vide Declaration U/s 4(1) and letter to Sub-Registrar for creation of charge dated 18.01.2018, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA. Documents executed:- D.P. Notes, Bearer Letters, Hypothecation- Cum-Loan Agreement, Consolidated/Multipurpose stamps undertakings, Undertakings/declarations and Deeds of Guarantee all dated 24.01.2018, which are Annexures A7 to A17 to this OA; Acknowledgements of debts dated 01.10.2020 & 19.09.2023, which are Annexures A18 to A24 to this OA and Statements of Accounts along with statement of uncharged interest, Certificate under Banker’s Book Evidence Act, which are Annexures A25 & A26 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.26,26,369.00, 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. 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 12.02.20225.

¶18

¶19

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Ajit Dadwal, Chief Manager, Bank of India h as been filed.

¶20

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶21

It was argued by learned proxy counsel through Video Conferencing 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 A26 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,26,369.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Nine 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.

¶22

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.65%p.a. for KCC and @10.50%p.a. for Agricultural Overdraft with half yearly rests from 25.10.2024 till the realization.

¶23

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 loans 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

¶24

¶25

the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶26

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.26,26,369.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Nine Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts 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 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.

¶27

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.03.2025. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 19.02.2025

¶28

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

Bank of India v. Lakhwinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Lakhwinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus Satnam Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Kartar Singh

Canara Bank versus M/S Gunu Fabrics

Bank of India versus M/S J.S.K.S and Sons

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Nishan Singh

Union Bank of India versus Baljeet Singh