Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Harpal Singh

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/378/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues of approx. Rs. 24.88 Lacs against a farmer-defendant who defaulted on a term loan for a combine harvester. The court reduced the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a. and directed recovery from hypothecated assets or attachment.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 24,88,584.78 with simple interest @ 8% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to attach/sell personal assets if dues remain unsatisfied.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Harpal Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.378/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.09.2025

¶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 Bouran 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

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Harpal Singh S/o Sh. Amar Singh R/o Village Gujjarheri, Post Office Mallewal, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶10

………. Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

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

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.24,88,584.78p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Eighty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four & Seventy Eight 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. 24.75 Lacs for purchase of new combine harvester vide Loan application form dated 14.03.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶15

¶16

OA NO.378/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIAVS SH. HARPAL SINGH

¶17

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 24.75 Lacs for purchase of new combine harvester vide Letter of Sanction cum process note dated 19.03.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶18

Defendant had had hypothecated his movable assets i.e. Combine Harvester Make: Akal Agro Industry, Model: AKAL-1699, Bearing registration No. PB11DG3199, Chassis No. AAI1699C24048 & Engine No. PRHM437028 vide Hypothecation agreement (for agriculture advance) and hypothecation (vehicles) agreement, both dated 19.03.2024, which are Annexure A4 and A5 to this OA. Quotation dated 18.03.2024 & Tax Invoice dated 27.03.2024, which are Annexure A15 (Colly) to this OA; Provisional registration certificate and registration certificate dated 23.04.2024, which are Annexure A16(Colly) to this OA.

¶19

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 19.03.2024, 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; Legal notice dated 23.10.2024 and 04.02.2025, along with postal receipts and translation, which are Annexure A17 (Colly) to this OA; Notice under section 13(2) dated 17.02.2025, which is Annexure A18 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A19 to this OA. 5. 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.24,88,584.78p, 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.

¶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 29.07.2025.

¶21

¶22

OA NO.378/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIAVS SH. HARPAL SINGH

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Kumar Kannaujia, Chief Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed.

¶24

Heard ex-parte 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 A19 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.24,88,584.78p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Eighty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four & Seventy Eight Paise Only) along with interest from the defendant, 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 @9.00%p.a. with monthly rests from 11.03.2025 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/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 realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶28

¶29

OA NO.378/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIAVS SH. HARPAL SINGH

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.24,88,584.78p (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Eighty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four & Seventy Eight 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.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 15.10.2025

¶34

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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 23.09.2025

¶35

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶36

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Harpal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Harpal 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

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