Allowed

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Sh. Tireth Singh

DRT19 Dec 2025OA/1949/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of loan dues of Rs. 32,05,416.21p with interest. The court held the evidence proved the bank's advance and ordered the recovery of dues by sale of mortgaged property or from personal assets of the respondents.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.32,05,416.21p with interest allowed; recovery via sale of mortgaged property or personal assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Tireth Singh — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1949/2022 Date of Institution: 15.11.2021 Date of Decision: 19.12.2025

¶4

Punjab & Sind Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at SME, 201, Dada Colony, Industrial Area, Jalandhar City, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Tireth Singh s/o Sh. Raweel Singh, r/o H.No.125-B, Khandala Farm, Village Fazalpur, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, Punjab. 2^nd Address: H.No.97, Khandala Farm, Village Fajalpur, PO Randhawa Masanda, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶8

Smt. Poonamdeep Kaur w/o Sh. Tireth Singh, r/o H.No.125-B, Khandala Farm, Village Fazalpur, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶9

2^nd Address: H.No.97, Khandala Farm, Village Fajalpur, PO Randhawa Masanda, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Sham Lal s/o Sh. Karam Chand, r/o H.No.B-9/449/19-A, Santokhpura, Jalandhar-I, Punjab.

¶11

Sh. Sukhdev Singh s/o Sh. Rawel Singh, r/o H.No.125-B, Khandala Farm, Village Fazalpur, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶12

……….Defendants

¶13

Advocates

¶14

Sh. Manjit Singh Rana, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 04.08.2025 .

¶15

OA for the Recovery of Rs.32,05,416.21p with interest @7.65% per annum with monthly rests from 15.11.2021.

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Punjab & Sind Bank has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.32,05,416.21p with interest against Sh. Tireth Singh and others (defendants).

¶18

¶19

Bank’s case is that on 26.11.2015, it had granted Home Loan-I of Rs.20.00Lacs to defendant Nos.1 and 2 under P.S.B. Housing Loan Scheme for Housing purpose. Again on 24.05.2016, bank granted Home Loan-II of Rs.3.70Lacs to defendant Nos.1 and 2 under P.S.B. Housing Loan Scheme for Housing purpose. To secure the loans, Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had mortgaged their property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.3 stood as guarantor for the Housing Loan-I and Defendant No.4 stood as guarantor for the Housing Loan-II. Both the loans were chargeable at different rates of interest. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 20.11.2018. On 14.11.2021, a sum of Rs.32,05,416.21p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶20

On 07.10.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 04.08.2025, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Chiranjiv Singh, Chief Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-35. 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 the total loan of Rs.23.70 Lacs and on 14.11.2021, a sum of Rs.32,05,416.21p (Rs.26,98,088.20p in Housing Loan I and Rs.5,07,328.01p in Housing Loan II) was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.32,05,416.21p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Five Thousand Four Hundred Sixteen and Paise Twenty One Only) with interest @7.65% per annum with monthly rests from 15.11.2021, till the date of payment is hereby

¶21

¶22

allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendant nos.1 and 2 would be joint and several and for the whole decretal amount whereas the liability of Defendant nos. 3 and 4 would be for the amount due in Housing Loan I and Housing Loan II respectively. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶23

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶24

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶25

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 23.01.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶26

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 19.12.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶27

MANOJ KALRA

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Sh. Tireth Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Sh. Tireth 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 versus Dinesh Manchanda

Central Bank of India versus M/S Kanha Trilogy

Icici Bank Limited versus Gulab Chand

Ashwin Bhagwatrao Gawalikar versus Dcb Bank Limited

Sham Lal Goyal versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus Teja Singh