Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Smt Ranjit Kaur

DRT4 Mar 2025OA/149/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Union Bank of India for the recovery of Rs.21,14,972.93p with interest from two defendants, one of whom was a guarantor. The court permitted recovery through the sale of mortgaged agricultural land and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.21,14,972.93p with interest directed; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale of mortgaged land and properties permitted for recovery.

Union Bank of India versus Smt Ranjit Kaur — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 149/2023 Date of Institution: 02.01.2023 Date of Decision: 04.03.2025

¶4

Union Bank of India, having its branches all over India and a branch at Bathinda, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Smt. Ranjit Kaur w/o Sh. Sukhmander Singh r/o Village Bhagi Bander, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo and District Bathinda, Punjab.

¶8

Sh. Desraj Singh s/o Sh. Bhola Singh, r/o Village Bhagi Bander, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo and District Bathinda, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Ms.Sonal proxy for Sh.Pankaj Beri, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- ex parte .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.21,14,972.93p with interest @12.50% per annum with half-yearly rests from 02.01.2023.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

UBI (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.21,14,972.93p with interest against Smt. Ranjit Kaur and another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 14.02.2015, it had granted a loan of Rs.13.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 in the form of K.C.C Limit, for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged her agricultural land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest

¶16

¶17

@12.50% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 01.12.2023, a sum of Rs.21,14,972.93p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 02.02.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 15.01.2024, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶19

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Sunil Kumar, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-10.

¶20

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.13.00 Lacs and on 01.12.2023, a sum of Rs.21,14,972.93p was due.

¶21

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.21,14,972.93p (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Fourteen Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Two and Ninety Three Paise Only) with interest @12.50% per annum with half-yearly rests from 02.01.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶22

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 03.04.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the

¶23

¶24

mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶25

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 04.03.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Smt Ranjit Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Smt Ranjit Kaur

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus Lakhbir Singh

State Bank of India versus Smt. Gurdeep Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Gurpreet Singh

Ms Arash Shuttering Store versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Hardeep Singh versus Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.

Chandan Sharma versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited