Allowed

Uco Bank v. Sh. Joginder Singh

DRT5 Mar 2025OA/285/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of outstanding dues from the defendant borrowers. The court reduced the claimed interest rate to 8% per annum and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate enforceable under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; defendants directed to pay Rs.37,08,312.44 with simple interest at 8% p.a.

Uco Bank versus Sh. Joginder Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.285/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 13.02.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 05.03.2025

¶6

UCO Bank, a body corporate and a nationalized bank under the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970 with its Head Office at 10, BTM, Sarani, Kolkata and amongst others having its branch at near new court, Adjoining SBI, Patiala Road, Sunam-148028 through its Branch Manager and Authorized Signatory Sh. Rohit Kalra S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Joginder Singh S/o Sh. Sadhu Singh R/o House No. 918, Village Sheron, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab-148028

¶10

Sh. Kulvir Singh S/o Sh. Joginder Singh, R/o House No. 918, Village Sheron, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab-148028

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Sumit Batra, Advocate for the Applicant Defendants are ex parte.

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.37,08,312.44p (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Eight Thousand Three Hundred Twelve and Paisa Forty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rohit Kalra, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Board Resolution, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of Cash Credit Limit-I (KCC) of Rs.22.00 Lacs, Cash Credit Limit-II (Government Subvention Scheme)

¶17

¶18

of Rs.3.00 Lacs and Term Loan (FITL) of Rs. 1,40,681/- vide Loan Application Form dated 17.10.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned Cash Credit Limit-I (KCC) of Rs.22.00 Lacs, Cash Credit Limit-II (Government Subvention Scheme) of Rs.3.00 Lacs and Term Loan (FITL) of Rs. 1,40,681.00 vide sanction Letter dated 20.10.2014 filed in compliance of order dated 08.01.2025 vide diary number 2576 dated 19.02.2025 and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Total land measuring 101K-09M situated in the area of Village Sheron-A Tehsil and District Sangrur, Punjab vide Declaration under Section 4 (1) dated 16.10.2014 along with its English Translations, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed:- Demand Promissory Note, Waiver Presentment (A-47), Waiver Presentment (A-3), Hypothecation-cum-Agreement, all dated 20.07.2014, which are Annexures A3 to A6 to this OA; Balance and Confirmation Letter dated 20.07.2017 and 13.07.2020, which are Annexures A8 & A9 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 19.03.2022 and 24.06.2022 along with Postal Receipts, which are Annexures A10 & A11 to this OA and Statement of Accounts along with Interest Calculation and Banker Book Evidence Act, which are Annexures A12 to A17 to this OA.

¶20

The loan accounts became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in all the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.37,08,312.44p, 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.

¶21

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 16.04.2024.

¶22

¶23

¶24

In support of the OA, affidavit of through Sh. Rohit Kalra, Branch Manager o f the applicant , UCO Bank has been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record.

¶25

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 A17 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans facilities which were granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendant failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.37,08,312.44p (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Eight Thousand Three Hundred Twelve and Paisa Forty Four Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.20%p.a. plus penal interest @2.00%p.a. with half yearly rests in all from 01.12.2022 till the realization.

¶27

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 of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 @8.00%p.a.in all 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.

¶28

¶29

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.37,08,312.44p (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Eight Thousand Three Hundred Twelve and Paisa Forty Four Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in all 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 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.

¶31

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 07.04.2025.

¶34

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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 05.03.2025

¶37

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

¶38

Uco Bank v. Sh. Joginder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Sh. Joginder 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

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Sumesh Chadha

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pargat Singh Toor

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Sawinder Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Kala Singh

Canara Bank versus M/s Nishkarsh Appreals

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Surinder Singh