Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Subhash Chand and Another

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/377/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank’s application for recovery of an outstanding loan of approximately Rs. 28 lakhs against a borrower and a guarantor. The Tribunal reduced the claimed interest rate from 13% to a uniform 8% and ordered the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,03,277.00 plus uniform simple interest @ 08.00% p.a. Issued Recovery Certificate. Parties to appear before Recovery Officer.

Bank of India versus Sh. Subhash Chand and Another — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.377/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 18.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.09.2025

¶6

Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & transfer of Undertaking) Act No. V of 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House” C-5, Block-G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and Branch Offices amongst other places at Bela Road, Ropar, District Roopnagar (Punjab), through its Principal cum Authorized Officer, Ms. Nisha Chauhan, Senior Branch Manager of the Applicant.

¶7

………..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Subhash Chand S/o Sh. Shiv Chand, R/o Village Bhedian, PO Kathagrh, Tehsil Balachaur, District Nawan Shehar (Pb)-144522

¶10

Sh. Baljinder Singh, S/o Sh. Jaspal Singh, R/o Village Rail Majra, Tehsil Balanchaur, District Nawan Shehar (Pb)-144533

¶11

........Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Anil Malhotra, Advocate proxy for Ms. Meena Malhotra, Advocate for Applicant

¶14

Defendants already ex parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.28,03,277.00p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Three Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Nisha Chauhan, Senior Branch Manager/Principal-cum-Authorized Officer of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide NPA Management Policy, 2024 & Authority Letter dated 21.06.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

2 OA NO.377/2025

¶18

BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUBHASH CHAND AND ANOTHER

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.7.50 Lacs and Agriculture Overdraft Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 13.05.2015, which is Annexure A2 & A3 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.7.50 Lacs and Agriculture Overdraft Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 18.05.2015, which is Annexure A6 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶21

Defendant no. 1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. Total land measuring 20K-01M situated in Village Bhedian, Hadbast No. 429, Tehsil Balachaur, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar (Nawan Shehar), Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4(1) and Letter to Sub-Registrar dated 14.05.2015, along with traslation which is Annexure A4 & A5 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed : - Demand Promissory Notes, Bearer Letter, Agreements of loan-cum-hypothecation, Consolidated/Multipurpose Stamp Undertakings and Deeds of Guarantee, all dated 18.05.2015, which are Annexures A7 to A16 to this OA; Acknowledgment of Debts dated 10.05.2018, 17.11.2020 & 08.11.2023, which are Annexures A17 to A22 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 16.08.2024, along with Postal Receipts, which are Annexures A23 to A25 to this OA and Statement of Account along with statement of uncharged interest duly certified under Banker’s Book Evidence Act, which is Annexure A26 & A27 to this OA.

¶23

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.28,03,277.00p, 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.

¶24

3 OA NO.377/2025

¶25

BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUBHASH CHAND AND ANOTHER

¶26

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 29.07.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Nisha Chauhan, Senior Branch Manager o f the applicant has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused records. 9. It was argued by learned proxy 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 A27 to this OA, it is proved that the approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, 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.28,03,277.00p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Three Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Seven 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @13.00%p.a. for KCC Limit and @13.50% p.a. for OD, both with half yearly rests from 10.03.2025 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 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

¶28

4 OA NO.377/2025 BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUBHASH CHAND AND ANOTHER

¶29

appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both 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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.28,03,277.00p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Three Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Seven Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both 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

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 15.10.2025. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 23.09.2025

¶32

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

Bank of India v. Sh. Subhash Chand and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Subhash Chand and Another

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

State Bank of India versus M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Resham Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Neeru Khosla

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Ravideep Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Beant Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjind Singh