Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Hartalam Singh

DRT16 Jan 2025OA/591/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against a defaulting borrower. After an ex parte hearing, the Tribunal declared the defendant liable to pay Rs. 23,25,648.00p plus 8% simple interest from the date of filing. The order authorized recovery from mortgaged properties and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendant declared liable to pay Rs. 23,25,648.00p with costs and 8% p.a. simple interest from the date of filing.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Hartalam Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.591/2023 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 20.04.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 16.01.2025

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., a banking company, carrying on banking business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, incorporated under The Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at HDFC bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013, whereas on of its branch at “Sardulgarh”, District Mansa, Punjab through Ms. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager (Agriculture Legal), HDFC Bank Ltd., Ludhiana Branch District Ludhiana, Punjab being power of attorney of the applicant.

¶6

……..Applicant Versus

¶7

Sh. Hartalam Singh S/o Sh. Nachhater Singh, R/o House No.120, Village Khokhar, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa (Haryana).

¶8

….……Defendant

¶9

Advocates:

¶10

Argued by Sh. Saurabh Bharadwaj, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) Defendants is ex parte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.23,25,648.00p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Twenty Five Thousand Six Hundred Forty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager (Agriculture Legal), o f the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 16.12.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶13

¶14

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.15.45 Lacs & Term Loans of Rs.4.45 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 11.04.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.15.45 Lacs & Term Loans of Rs.4.45 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 06.05.2014, which are Annexures A3 & A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 40Kanal-00Marla situated at Village Khokhar, Teshil Dabwali, District Sirsa (Haryana) vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing Vasika No.519 and letter to Tehsildar for Entrance of Mutation both dated 07.05.2014, which are Annexures A11 & A12 to this OA. Documents executed:- DP Note, Letter of Continuity, Agreement for Term Loan Cum guarantee cum hypothecation, all dated 13.05.2014, which are Annexures A5 to A10 to this OA; Acknowledgement of debts dated 04.03.2020, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 15.03.2023 with postal receipts, which is Annexure A14 to this OA and CC Limit of statements of accounts & Term Loan Account statement with certificate, which are Annexures A15 & A16 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.23,25,648.00p, which is recoverable and the defendant were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 08.01.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager (Agriculture Legal), HDFC Bank Ltd., h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record

¶15

¶16

It was argued by learned counsel (through Video

¶17

Conferencing) 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 A16 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendant were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,25,648.00p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Twenty Five thousand Six Hundred Forty Eight Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶18

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. along with penal interest @2.00%p.a. from 29.12.2022 till the realization.

¶19

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 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 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.

¶20

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.23,25,648.00p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Twenty Five Thousand Six Hundred Forty Eight Only) with costs, current and future simple interest

¶21

¶22

@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 defendant in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the 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.

¶23

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 25.02.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant bank 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: 16.01.2025

¶24

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Hartalam Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Hartalam 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Dalbir Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Vp Associates and Others

Bank of India versus Tajinder Pal Singh and others

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Radhe Krishna Enterprises and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Amrjit Kaur and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Amarjeet Singh