Allowed

Canara Bank v. Shri Satnam Singh

DRT13 Mar 2025OA/2048/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Canara Bank's application to recover Rs.23,24,517/- plus interest from two defendants who mortgaged land and stood as guarantor. Application proceeded ex parte. Liability declared joint and several.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.23,24,517/- with interest directed from the joint and several liable defendants via sale of mortgaged land or attachment of other properties.

Canara Bank versus Shri Satnam Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2048/2022

¶4

Date of Institution: 04.10.2022 Date of Decision: 13.03.2025

¶5

Canara Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Gurdaspur Main, Near New Bus Stand District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Sh. Satnam Singh s/o Buta Singh, r/o Village Bahian Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶9

Baghel Singh s/o Balbir Singh, r/o Village Bahian Post Office Tibber, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Mr. Satish Jaswal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- ex parte .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.23,24,517/- with interest @11.05% per annum with half-yearly rests from 04.10.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Canara Bank, (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.23,24,517/- with interest against Sh. Satnam Singh and another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 15.07.2014, it had granted a loan of Rs.15.00 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 his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @11.05% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 20.09.2022, a sum of Rs.23,24,517/- was due from

¶17

2 the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.
3. On 03.11.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by
registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 22.05.2023, they were proceeded_ex_ parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Gursewak Singh, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-14. 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 loan of Rs.15.00 Lacs and on 20.09.2022, a sum of Rs.23,24,517/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.23,24,517/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Five
Hundred Seventeen Only) with interest @11.05% per annum with half- yearly rests from 04.10.2022, 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 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.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
14.04.2025,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.

¶18

¶19

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: 13.03.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Shri Satnam Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Shri Satnam 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

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Royal Ventures

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Apd Fashion Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank (E-Syndicate Bank) versus M/S Shree Krishna Traders

Prabhat Kumar versus Iifl Home Finance Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Paramjit Kaur

State Bank of India versus Promila Jain