Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Gulabbir Singh and Others

DRT23 Jun 2025OA/206/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the recovery application filed by HDFC Bank Limited against five respondents for Rs. 71,83,603.90 p arising from a loan default. The Tribunal modified the claimed interest rates, granting a uniform simple interest of 8% per annum from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.71,83,603.90 p with 8% p.a. simple interest; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale of mortgaged properties authorized.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Gulabbir Singh and Others — Cheque Dishonour | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.206/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.02.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.06.2025

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, having its Registered Office at Senapati Bapat Marg, lower Parel (West) Mumbai-400013. Also at Plot No. 1-15, sector -101, Alpha IT City, Mohali through its authorized representative Mr. Dinesh Kumar.

¶7

.. … …..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. Gulabbir Singh S/o Sulakhan Singh, 18-B, Guru Amardass Avenue, Lane No.2, Airport Road, Amritsar- 143001

¶10

Also At: H. No.34, Panjwarh, Tarn Taran- 143001

¶11

2. Didar Singh S/o Sulakhan Singh, 18-B, Guru Amardass Avenue, Lane No.2, Airport Road, Amritsar- 143001

¶12

Also At: H. No.34, Panjwarh, Tarn Taran- 143001

¶13

3. Jaswinder Kaur W/o Sulakhan Singh, 18-B, Guru Amardass Avenue, Lane No.2, Airport Road, Amritsar- 143001

¶14

Also At: H. No.34, Panjwarh, Tarn Taran- 143001

¶15

4. Sulakhan Singh S/o Kundan Singh, 18-B, Guru Amardass Avenue, Lane No.2, Airport Road, Amritsar- 143001

¶16

Also At: H. No.34, Panjwarh, Tarn Taran- 143001

¶17

Sawaran Singh S/o Kashmeer Singh Ward No.7, Sohal Thathi, Tarn Taran- 143302

¶18

….……Defendants

¶19

Advocates:

¶20

Argued by Sh. Surinder Chawla, Advocate proxy for Sh. Rajesh Jangra, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

2 OA No.206-2025

¶23

HDFC BANK LIMITED VS GULABBIR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶24

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.71,83,603.90p (Rupees Seventy One Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Six Hundred Three and Paise Ninety Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized Representative o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 17.01.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶25

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.55.00 Lacs and DOD Limit of Rs. 17.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 06.06.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶26

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.55.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 28.06.2017, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶27

Defendant nos.1 to 4 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. The Land measuring 256 Kanal situated in the area of Village Panjwar A and, B hadbast no.196, District Tarn Taran vide Declaration U/s 4(1) both dated 10.07.2017, which is Annexures A5(colly) to his OA.

¶28

Documents executed:- Loan Agreement for Cash Credit dated 14.07.2017, which is Annexure A4(colly) to this OA Demand Notice dated 06.11.2024 with Postal Receipt, which is Annexures A6(Colly) to this OA; Statements of Accounts with certificate, which is Annexures A7(Colly) to this OA.

¶29

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.71,83,603.90p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding

¶30

3 OA No.206-2025 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS GULABBIR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶31

amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

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 16.06.2025.

¶33

7.	In support of the OA, affidavit ofSh. Dinesh Kumar, Authorized
Repr	esentative,HDFC Bank Limited, has been filed.
8.	Heard arguments and perused record.

¶34

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A7 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank 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 loans 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 bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.71,83,603.90p (Rupees Seventy One Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Six Hundred Three and Paise Ninety 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.

¶35

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. plus penal interest @16.00%p.a. with half yearly rests from 05.11.2024 till the realization. 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

¶36

4 OA No.206-2025 HDFC BANK LIMITED VS GULABBIR SINGH AND OTHERS

¶37

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

¶38

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.71,83,603.90p (Rupees Seventy One Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Six Hundred Three and Paise Ninety Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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.

¶39

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶40

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 14.07.2025.

¶41

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.

¶42

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶43

Dated: 23.06.2025

¶44

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

¶45

¶46

OA No.206-2025

¶47

HDFC BANK LIMITED VS GULABBIR SINGH AND OTHERS

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Gulabbir Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Gulabbir Singh and Others

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 M.H. Industries

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Rohtash Kumar and Others

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S Hari Om Trading Company and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Harshpinder Singh and Others

Idbi Bank Limited versus Amar Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Rajat Agro Products and Another