Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Arshdeep Singh and Another

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/1364/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under the RDB Act sought recovery of a defaulted loan facility of approx Rs. 20.83 lacs from borrowers. The Tribunal, hearing the matter ex-parte, allowed the application, declared the amount due, and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate with interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants declared liable to pay Rs. 20,83,415.65 with simple interest at 8% p.a. Courts to enforce against mortgaged and personal assets.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Arshdeep Singh and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1364/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 15.09.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.11.2025

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 and its Regional Office at HDFC Bank Ltd., Bank House, Plot No I-15, Sector 101 Alpha, IT City, Mohali, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab -160062 and having one of its branch office at Malout, District Muktsar (Punjab) through its Authorized Signatory Sh. Sandeep Kumar Garg.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Arshdeep Singh Son of Sh. Sukhwinder Singh Resident of House No. 325, Village Kandhu Khera, at Near School, Tehsil Malout, District Muktsar-152107.

¶10

Smt. Paramjit Kaur Wife of Sh. Sukhwinder Singh Resident of House No. 325, Village Kandhu Khera, at Near School, Tehsil Malout, District Muktsar-152107.

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Present: Sh. Rahul Garg, Advocate proxy for Sh. Ankur Jindal, Advocate for Applicant

¶14

Defendants already ex parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.20,83,415.65p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Four Hundred Fifteen & Paise Sixty Five Only) The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sandeep Kumar Garg, Authorized Signatory of the applicant, who is competent

¶17

2 OA NO.1364/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS SH.ARSHDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶18

to institute the Original Application Power of Attorney dated 17.01.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for grant of KCC facility of Rs.15.00 Lacs & Agri. Term Loan of Rs.3.85 Lacs vide Application for loan dated 20.04.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the KCC facility of Rs.14.50 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 04.05.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendants mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. land measuring 88K-00M situated at Village Kandhu Khera, Sub-Tehsil Lambi, Tehsil Malout, District Muktsar Sahib, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4 (1) dated 11.05.2015, bearing rapat no.185, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Confirmation letter by advocate dated 15.05.2015 regarding mortgage, which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed: Agreement for Overdraft/Cash Credit cum Guarantee cum hypothecation dated 15.05.2015, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Statement of account along with certificate under Banker’s Book of Evidence, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA; Legal notice dated 19.06.2025, along with Postal receipts which are Annexure 9 to 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.20,83,415.65p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but defendants 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 notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 14.11.2025.

¶25

3 OA NO.1364/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS SH.ARSHDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶26

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sandeep Kumar Garg, Authorized Signatory, HDFC Bank Limited, has been filed.

¶27

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶28

It was argued by learned proxy 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 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.20,83,415.65p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Four Hundred Fifteen & Paise Sixty 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 account.

¶29

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has interest @12%p.a. with monthly rests from 01.04.2025 till the realization.

¶30

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/hypothecated assets, 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 @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till

¶31

4 OA NO.1364/2025 HDFC BANK LTD. VS SH.ARSHDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶32

realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.20,83,415.65p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Four Hundred Fifteen & Paise Sixty Five 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets 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. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 01.12.2025. 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: 19.11.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Arshdeep Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Arshdeep 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

Messrs Rosy Hi Tech Spinning Mills and Others versus Punjab National Bank

Gaurav Chandola and Another versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Jai Jeet Enterprises and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Another

Canara Bank versus Sh. Malkeet Singh and Another

Central Bank of India versus M/S Paras Traders and Others