Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Smt Neha Rana

DRT11 Dec 2025OA/494/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application to recover a debt of Rs.55,57,377.51p (Rupees Fifty Five Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Seventy Seven and Fifty One Paise) with interest from the applicant debtor's legal heirs. A recovery certificate was issued and the matter was remanded for distribution of sale proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.47,21,546.51p in C.C. Limit with interest @8.90% p.a. and Rs.8,35,831/- in Term Loan with interest @7.85% p.a., along with a recovery certificate.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Smt Neha Rana — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 494/2022 Date of Institution: 11.03.2022 Date of Decision: 11.12.2025

¶4

Indian Overseas Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Tehsil Road, PUDA Complex, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Smt. Neha Rana wd/o Sh. Kanwardeep Singh s/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh, c/o M/s Nau Nihal Enterprises, Shop No.5, Gali No.9, Adda Bastian Road, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶8

Emaan minor s/o Late Sh. Kanwardeep Singh s/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh, through Smt. Neha Rana, mother, natural Guardian and next friend r/o H.No.2, Vasant Vihar, Urban Estate, Phase-2, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶9

Smt. Rupinder Kaur Bhasin w/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh, r/o H.No.7/235, Vijay Nagar, Near Kalgirdhar Gurudwara, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Ms. Seerat Sharma proxy counsel for Sh. I.S. Bhatia, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶13

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 06.03.2024 .

¶14

OA for the Recovery of Rs.55,57,377.51p with interest from 11.03.2022.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Indian Overseas Bank has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.55,57,377.51p with interest against Smt. Neha Rana and others (defendants).

¶17

Bank’s case is that on 05.02.2015, it had granted a loan of Rs.20.00Lacs to borrower, Sh. Kanwardeep Singh on behalf on his proprietorship firm M/s Nau Nihal Enterprises in the form of O.C.C Limit

¶18

¶19

for Business purpose. The Limit was enhanced from Rs.20.00 Lacs to Rs.30.00 Lacs on 21.11.2016. The above limit was renewed from time to time and lastly on 21.11.2019. Again on 02.06.2020, during the COVID19 pandemic period, bank granted a Term Loan of Rs.6,45,000/- to Sh. Kanwardeep Singh. In October of 2020, the O.C.C. Limit was converted to C.C. Limit under C.G.T.S.M.E. Scheme and enhanced the limit from Rs.30.00Lacs to Rs.40.00Lacs and also granted a F.I.T.L. of Rs.2.08Lacs. Mr. Kanwardeep Singh is deceased and now represented through his legal heirs Defendant nos. 1 to 3. The loans were chargeable at different rates of interest. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 03.10.2016 and 10.11.2017. On 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.55,57,377.51p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶20

3. On 29.03.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by
registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put
in appearance. Vide order dated 06.03.2024, they were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Sh. Ravindra Kumar Pandey, Branch Manager along with the
loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-58.
5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered
view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loans under various schemes and on 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.55,57,377.51p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.55,57,377.51p (Rupees Fifty Five Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Three
Hundred Seventy Seven and Paise Fifty One Only) i.e. Rs.47,21,546.51p
in C.C. Limit with interest @8.90% p.a. and Rs.8,35,831/- in Term Loan
with interest @7.85% p.a. (both facilities) with monthly rests from
11.03.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The

¶21

¶22

liability of defendant Nos. 1 to 3, being legal heirs of Sh. Kanwardeep Singh would be limited upto the extent of the property inherited by them from him.

¶23

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶24

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 16.01.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶25

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶26

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 11.12.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶27

MANOJ KALRA

Indian Overseas Bank v. Smt Neha Rana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Smt Neha Rana

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

Jalaludheen U K versus South Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Ramandeep Singh

Darshna Devi versus PNB Housing Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus Mandeep Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sukhwinder Singh

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Piara Singh