Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Manjit Singh

DRT8 Oct 2025OA/368/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a term loan of Rs.23.57 lakhs. The court reduced the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a. and ordered issuance of a Recovery Certificate, enabling enforcement against hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendant liable to pay Rs.23,57,394.30p plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Manjit Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.368/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 08.10.2025

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office Union Bank at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai having its Regional office at UT Chandigarh and its branch at Nabha Main Branch, Balraj Complex, Near Bora Gate, Patiala Road, Nabha District Patiala (Punjab) through its chief manager Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kannaujia who is constituted Power of attorney and Principal Officer.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus Sh. Manjit Singh S/o Sh. Nahar Singh R/o Village Thuhi, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala (Punjab). ………. Defendant

¶8

Advocates:

¶9

Argued by Sh. Banni Thomas, Advocate for the applicant Defendant already ex-parte

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.23,57,394.30p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Four & Thirty Paise Only). The Original Application has been filed Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kannaujia, Chief Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of attorney dated 25.10.2014, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs.23.40 Lacs under Union Agriculture Infrastructure Loan Scheme (UAILS) for purchase of new Combine Harvester Machine vide Loan application form dated 29.08.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶12

¶13

OA NO.368/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIAVS SH. MANJIT SINGH

¶14

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs.23.40 Lacs under Union Agriculture Infrastructure Loan Scheme (UAILS) for purchase of new Combine Harvester Machine vide Letter of Sanction dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶15

Defendant had hypothecated his immovable assets i.e. Combine Harvester Make: Lal Agro Industries Model: LAL-930, bearing Engine PLE353011, Chasis no. LAI930I0231011, Registration no. PB11DE1538, vide hypothecation agreement (for agriculture advances) dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; hypothecation (vehicle) agreement dated 31.08.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Quotation dated 22.08.2023, Tax Invoice dated 18.09.2023, Provisional Registration certificate, Registration certificate, Form-21, Form-22, which are Annexure A15 (Colly) to this OA.

¶16

Documents executed:- Letter of general Lien and Set off, Letter from undertaking, Interest agreement, Declaration / Undertaking, Letter of continuity, Simple loan agreement, Term loan agreement, Demand Promissory Note, all dated 31.08.2023, which are Annexures A6 to A13 to this OA; Annexure A-1 Format of letter to obtained from borrower, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Recall notice/ Legal notice dated 03.06.2024, 23.10.2024 and 04.02.2025 along with postal receipts and translation, which are Annexure A16 (Colly) to this OA; Notice under section 13(2) dated 17.02.2025, which is Annexure A17 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A18 to this OA.

¶17

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.23,57,394.30p, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶18

¶19

OA NO.368/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIAVS SH. MANJIT SINGH

¶20

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 04.08.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kannaujia, Chief Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. 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 A18 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,57,394.30p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Four & Thirty Paise Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶21

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00%p.a. with monthly rests from 04.03.2025 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/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendant, 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

¶22

¶23

OA NO.368/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIAVS SH. MANJIT SINGH

¶24

realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.23,57,394.30p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Four & Thirty Paise Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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 vehicle of the defendant 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 defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶26

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶27

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.10.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶28

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 08.10.2025

¶29

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

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Manjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Manjit 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

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Karamjit Singh and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Manjeet Singh and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Hardayal Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Smt. Sukhpal Kaur and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Kashmir Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Raj Kumar and Others