Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh. Hoshiar Singh

DRT3 Nov 2025OA/522/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Defendants failed to appear in the recovery application filed by Canara Bank under Section 19 of the RDB Act. The Tribunal, proceeding ex parte, found the debt proved and allowed recovery with interest from all defendants jointly and severally via sale of mortgaged or personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.36,25,852.94 with interest at 11.95% p.a. and costs allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Joint and several liability imposed.

Canara Bank versus Sh. Hoshiar Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 522/2022 Date of Institution: 28.02.2022 Date of Decision: 03.11.2025

¶4

Canara Bank at Dacher, District Karnal, Haryana

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Hoshiar Singh S/o Sh. Karnail Singh

¶7

Sh. Gulzar Singh S/o Sh. Karnail Singh 3. Smt. Pritam Kaur W/o Sh. Karnail Singh All r/o Village Uplana, Tehsil Assandh, District Karnal, Haryana

¶8

Sh. Major Singh S/o Sh. Avtar Singh, r/o Village Dera Verna, VPO Dacher, Tehsil Nissing, District Karnal, Haryana …….Defendants

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Smt. Hemlata Issar, Counsel for the applicant bank Defendants- ex parte

¶11

OA for the Recovery of Rs.36,25,852.94p with interest @11.95% per annum with half-yearly rests from 28.02.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Canara Bank (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.36,25,852.94p with interest against Sh. Hoshiar Singh and Others (defendants).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 13.08.2009, it had granted loans of Rs.2.95 Lacs in the form of KCC Facility and Rs.4.00 Lacs in the form of Term

¶15

¶16

Loan Facility on 18.08.2009 to the defendants for agricultural purpose. To secure the loans, the defendants had mortgaged their property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loans were chargeable to interest @7% per annum with half-yearly rests in KCC Facility and @11.50% per annum with half-yearly rests in Term loan Facility. Defendants had acknowledged and admitted their liability for debt on 10.08.2012, 12.10.2013, 28.08.2014, 15.09.2016, 28.03.2017 and 15.09.2019. On 19.01.2022, a sum of Rs.36,25,852.94p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

On 04.05.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 22.11.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶18

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Ashish Juneja, Authorised Official along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-22. 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 loan of Rs.6.95 Lacs and on 19.01.2022, a sum of Rs.36,25,852.94p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.36,25,852.94p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Two and Ninety Four Paisa Only) with interest @11.95% per annum with half-yearly rests from 28.02.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property(ies) fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as

¶19

¶20

well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶21

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 12.12.2025 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property(ies) and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶22

Pronounced in the open Court (A S Narang) Dated: 03.11.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh (Additional charge)

Canara Bank v. Sh. Hoshiar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh. Hoshiar 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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Harjit Singh

Canara Bank versus Shri Harpal Singh

Idbi Bank versus Amrik Kaur

Canara Bank versus M/S Lucky Plast India

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Sai Constructions

State Bank of India versus Sh. Harnek Singh