Allowed

Uco Bank v. Late Sh. Ajaib Singh through His Legal and Another

DRT19 Dec 2025OA/193/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's application under the RDB Act for recovery of an NPA loan of Rs. 52,55,742.15. The court dismissed the default defense, struck off the respondents' name, and ordered recovery from hypothecated assets. Interest was fixed at 8% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants liable to pay Rs. 52,55,742.15 with interest @8% p.a.; Recovery via sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property.

Uco Bank versus Late Sh. Ajaib Singh through His Legal and… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.193/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.10.2021

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.12.2025

¶6

UCO BANK, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 10-B.T.M., Sarani, Kolkatta (A Government of India Undertaking) and having one of its Branch situated at Landran, District SAS Nagar Mohali through Sh. Sahil Kumar, who is presently working as Senior Manager and Principal Officer being Branch Head.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Ajaib Singh since deceased through LRs

¶10

i) Surjit Kaur Wife of Late Sh. Ajaib Singh

¶11

ii) Kesar Singh S/o Late Sh. Ajaib Singh

¶12

iii) Narinder Singh S/o Late Sh. Ajaib Singh

¶13

iv) Jagtar Singh S/o Late Sh. Ajaib Singh

¶14

v) Balwinder Singh S/o Late Sh. Ajaib Singh

¶15

All resident of village Gudana, P.O. Giga Majra, Tehsil and District Mohali.

¶16

Sh. Kesar Singh S/o Sh. Ajaib Singh, resident of village Gudana,

¶17

P.O. Giga Majra, Tehsil and District Mohali.

¶18

………. Defendants

¶19

Advocates:

¶20

Argued by Sh. Nonish Kumar, Advocate for the applicant Defendants already ex-parte

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

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.52,55,742.15 (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Two & Paise Fifteen only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sahil Kumar,

¶23

¶24

OA NO.193/2022 UCO BANK VS. AJAIB SINGH THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND ANOTHER

¶25

Senior Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Bank’s Circular dated 20.07.2012, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶26

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 (since deceased) and defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.55.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 17.10.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶27

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.53.30 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 16.11.2013, which is Annexure A12 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant no. 1 (since deceased) and defendant no.2. Pre sanction visit report dated 29.09.2013 and pre disbursement visit report dated 23.11.2013, which are Annexures A3 and A4 to this OA. Process note, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶28

Defendant no. 1(since deceased) had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. Land measuring 13K-18M situated at Village Bathlana, Hadbast No.284, Tehsil and District SAS Nagar, Punjab vide Mortgage deed bearing vasika no.2342 dated 19.11.2013, along with its translation, which is Annexure A13 to this OA. Advocate report on title dated 30.09.2013, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Non encumbrance certificate, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Jamabandi for the year 2011-12 and 2009-10, along with its translation which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Valuation report dated 19.09.2013, which is Annexure A11 to this OA. Documents executed: Statements of means, which are Annexures A5 & A6 to this OA; Hypothecation agreement, waive presentment, DP Note, Promise to pay, all dated 28.11.2013, which are Annexures A14 to A17 to this OA; Certificate of posting dated 04.03.2021, which is Annexure A18 to this OA; Demand Notice dated 04.03.2021 & 23.09.2021, along with translation, which are Annexures A19 & A20 to this OA; Recall notice dated 06.10.2021, which is Annexure A21 to

¶29

¶30

OA NO.193/2022 UCO BANK VS. AJAIB SINGH THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND ANOTHER

¶31

this OA and Statement of Accounts, which are Annexures A22 to A24 to this OA.

¶32

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.52,55,742.15, 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.

¶33

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal. Sh. J.C. Kapoor, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendants on 28.02.2023. Power of Attorney on behalf of defendants was filed by Sh. J.C. Kapoor, Advocate on 23.03.2023 and WS was filed on 17.11.2023. Since, the WS filed by defendants was beyond stipulated period, the same was taken on record subject to payment of cost of Rs. 7,000/-. However, the defendants did not deposit the cost, therefore, their defense was struck off on 24.10.2024. Thereafter, OA was dismissed for default of applicant on 28.10.2024. The same was restored on its original number vide order dated 25.03.2025 passed in MA no. 178/2024. Defendants were served notices regarding restoration of the OA but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 12.08.2025.

¶34

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sahil Kumar, Senior Manager, UCO Ban k, has been filed.

¶35

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶36

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 A24 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no. 1 (since deceased) and defendant no. 2 approached the 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.

¶37

¶38

OA NO.193/2022 UCO BANK VS. AJAIB SINGH THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND ANOTHER

¶39

The they failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, the accounts were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.52,55,742.15 (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Two & Paise Fifteen 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.

¶40

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.20%p.a. with 2% penal interest from 01.10.2021 till realization.

¶41

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 accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶42

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.52,55,742.15 (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Two & Paise Fifteen only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan accounts 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

¶43

¶44

OA NO.193/2022 UCO BANK VS. AJAIB SINGH THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND ANOTHER

¶45

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 07.01.2026.

¶46

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.

¶47

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 19.12.2025.

¶48

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

Uco Bank v. Late Sh. Ajaib Singh through His Legal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Late Sh. Ajaib Singh through His Legal 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurwinder Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Tarsem Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Ranjodh Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Netarpal Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Navdeep Singh Sohal

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jatinder Singh