Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sandeep Singh

DRT21 Nov 2025OA/1368/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This DRT allowed an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India against Sandeep Singh for recovery of an agricultural loan. The Tribunal decreed the principal amount and fixed future interest at 8% p.a., ordering attachment and sale of the hypothecated vehicle if dues remained unsatisfied.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.24,50,865.60 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. enforcement via sale of hypothecated vehicle or attachment of personal assets.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sandeep Singh — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1368/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 18.09.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 21.11.2025

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and transfer of undertakings) Act no. V of 1970 and having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of the Branch amongst other places at Bhadson, Tehsil Nabha, Distt. Patiala through its General Power of Attorney cum Branch Manager Sh. Manpreet Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Sandeep Singh s/o Sh. Baljinder Singh R/o Village Sakrali, P.O. Bhadson, Tehsil Nabha, Distt. Patiala - 147202.

¶9

….……Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Abhineet Taneja, Advocate for applicant

¶12

Defendant is ex parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.24,50,865.60p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Five & Paise Sixty Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Manpreet Singh, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of attorney dated 09.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant had approached the applicant for the grant of Term loan of Rs.24.50 Lacs for purchase of Combine Harvester.

¶16

2 OA/1368/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SANDEEP SINGH

¶17

The applicant sanctioned the Term loan of Rs.24.50 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 26.07.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶18

Defendant had hypothecated Combine Harvester Make: BSMS Agriculture Workshop, Model: HARDEV 950, bearing Registration no. PB34D2863, Engine No.RKHM111912, Chassis No.BSMSH950H240051, vide Hypothecation Agreement (for agricultural advances) and hypothecation (vehicles) agreement, both dated 26.07.2024, which are Annexures A3 and A4 to this OA. Registration certificate of vehicle dated 03.08.2024, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed: - General Term loan agreement, DP Note along with letter of Continuity, all dated 26.07.2024, which are Annexures A5 and A6 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 10.09.2025, which is Annexure A8 to this OA and Statement of account, which is Annexure A9 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.24,50,865.60p, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶21

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 14.11.2025.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Manpreet Singh, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte 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 A9 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant

¶23

3 OA/1368/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SANDEEP SINGH

¶24

approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that he 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 was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.24,50,865.60p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Five & Paise Sixty Only) along with interest from the defendant, 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@9%p.a. with half yearly rest form the 01.08.2025.

¶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/hypothecated assets, 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 account 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 defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.24,50,865.60p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Five & Paise Sixty 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

¶27

¶28

OA/1368/2025

¶29

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SANDEEP SINGH

¶30

hypothecated vehicle of the defendant 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 defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 03.12.2025.

¶34

Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 21.11.2025.

¶37

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

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sandeep Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sandeep 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Ranjodh Singh and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus sh. Ekam Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Balwinder Singh

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Perfect Paving and Another

State Bank of India versus Late Sh. Maya Chand through His Legal Heirs and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Lakhwinder Singh and Another