Hdfc Bank v. Gurnam Singh
Case brief
What is this about?
The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, for recovery of ₹48,34,598/- with interest against the respondents, directing issuance of a recovery certificate.
What did the court decide?
Recovery application allowed; recovery certificate to be issued; liability of respondents declared joint and several.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER
OA No: 189/2023
Date of Institution: 29.12.2022 Date of Decision: 07.04.2025 HDFC Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Mudhal Branch, District Amritsar, Punjab. ……..Applicant Vs. 1. Gurnam Singh s/o Sh. Kulwant Singh, r/o Village Verka Jahangir, Tehsil & District Amritsar, Punjab. 2. Kulwant Singh s/o Sh. Bishan Singh, r/o Village Verka Jahangir, Tehsil & District Amritsar, Punjab. 3. Harpal Singh s/o Sh. Jagtar Singh, r/o H. No. 179, Village Jahangir Verka, Tehsil & District Amritsar, Punjab. ……….Defendants Advocates Sh. Saurabh Bhardwaj, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte . OA for the Recovery of Rs.48,34,598/- with interest @11.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 29.12.2022. ORDER 1. HDFC Bank Limited, (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.48,34,598/- with interest against Sh. Gurnam Singh and others (defendants). 2. Bank’s case is that on 19.11.2015, it had granted CC Limit-I of Rs.33.90 Lacs and CC Limit-II of Rs.7.00 Lacs to defendant Nos. 1 and 2 for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No.2 had
| 2 |
|---|
| mortgaged his agricultural land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the |
| application). Defendant No.3 stood as guarantor. The loans were |
| chargeable to different rates of interest. On 30.11.2022, a sum of |
| Rs.48,34,598/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application. |
| 3. On 09.02.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 19.01.2024, they were proceeded_ex_ parte. |
| 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Harminder Pal Singh, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-15. |
| 5. 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 CC Limit-I of Rs.33.90 Lacs and CC Limit-II of Rs.7.00 Lacs and on 30.11.2022, a sum of Rs.48,34,598/- was due. |
| 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of |
| Rs.48,34,598/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Thirty Four Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Eight Only) with interest @11.60% per annum with half- yearly rests from 29.12.2022, 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 agricultural land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. |
| 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. |
| 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. |
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the application for recovery of dues under Section 19 of the RBI Act is maintainable and proven.
Whether the recovery certificate should be issued in favor of the applicant bank.
Whether the defendants are liable for joint and several repayment of the outstanding amount.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
HDFC Bank Limited
- respondent
Gurnam Singh
- respondent
Kulwant Singh
- respondent
Harpal Singh
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court