Allowed

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Sh. Mohan Lal and Another

DRT28 Oct 2025OA/151/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for recovery of a debt. The court directed the defendants to pay the principal sum with simple interest at a modified rate of 8% per annum and authorized enforcement through sale of mortgaged or personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,49,599.69 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date till realization; issue of recovery certificate.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Mohan Lal and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.151/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 05.02.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 28.10.2025

¶6

Punjab and Sind Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies, (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1980 having its Head Office at 21, Rajindra Place, New Delhi and a Zonal Office at situated at Hoshiarpur, and inter alia a branch office situated at Banga, Road, Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar, Punjab through its Constituted Attorney Sh. Mandeep Singh, Chief Manager, Punjab and Sind Bank, Banga Road, Branch Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar, Punjab and who is the also the principal officer of the Applicant/plaintiff.

¶7

……. Applicant Versus 1. Sh. Mohan Lal Son of Hem Raj, R/o Village Garhi Kanugo, Tehsil Balachaur, District SBS Nagar, Punjab. 2. Sh. Gurbaksh Singh Son of Sh. Lemamber Singh R/o Village Garhi Kanugo, Tehsil Balachaur, District SBS Nagar, Punjab .

¶8

………. Defendants Advocates:

¶9

Argued by Sh. Ashok Kumar Verma, Advocate for Applicant Defendants already ex parte

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.22,49,599.69p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Nine & Sixty Nine Paise only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mandeep Singh, Chief Manager, of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 11.08.2016, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶12

¶13

OA NO.151/2025 PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS SH.MOHAN LAL AND ANOTHER

¶14

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 26.10.2012, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶15

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 26.10.2012, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants.

¶16

Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 16 kanal situated at Village Garhi Kanugo, Hadbast No.188, Tehsil Balachaur, District SBS Nagar, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika No.1836 dated 25.07.2012, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶17

Documents executed : - DP Note, Letter of Continuity, Agreement of hypothecation, Letter of waiver form no.106, Letter of consent by the borrower, Consent letter by the guarantor, Deed of continuing guarantee, all dated 26.10.2012, which are Annexures A4 to A7, A10, A11 and A13 to this OA; Form no.201, Form no.199, Revised clause pertaining to rate of Interest, which are Annexure A8, A9 and A12 to this OA; Balance and Security Confirmations letters dated 19.03.2015, 06.02.2018, 22.06.2020 & 31.05.2023, which are Annexures A15 to A18 to this OA; Legal notice dated 13.09.2023, 04.01.2024 & 19.09.2024, which are Annexures A19 to A21 to this OA and Statement of Account along with certificate, which is Annexure A22 to this OA.

¶18

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.22,49,599.69p, 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.

¶19

¶20

OA NO.151/2025 PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS SH.MOHAN LAL AND ANOTHER

¶21

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 23.10.2025.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mandeep Singh, Chief Manage r, Punjab and Sind Bank, h as been filed.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

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 A22 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.22,49,599.69p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Nine & Sixty Nine Paise 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.

¶25

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.45% p.a. with half yearly rests from 01.10.2024 till the realization.

¶26

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 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

¶27

¶28

OA NO.151/2025 PUNJAB AND SIND BANK VS SH.MOHAN LAL AND ANOTHER

¶29

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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum Rs.22,49,599.69p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Nine & Sixty Nine Paise 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 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 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.

¶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 07.11.2025.

¶34

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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 28.10.2025

¶37

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶38

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Sh. Mohan Lal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Sh. Mohan Lal 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

Bank of India versus M/S Radhika Enterprises and Another

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Sunil Kumar Yadav

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jatinder Gupta and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Hardeep Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Ramanjit Kaur and Another