Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh. Malkeet Singh and Another

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/606/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of an outstanding NPA loan of Rs.30,38,798.96p. The court deemed it just to grant a uniform simple interest rate of 08.00%p.a. instead of the claimed rates, ordered recovery from mortgaged assets under SARFAESI, and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.30,38,798.96p with costs and simple interest at 08.00%p.a. from sale of mortgaged/hypothecated assets via Recovery Certificate.

Canara Bank versus Sh. Malkeet Singh and Another — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.606/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.05.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.11.2025

¶6

Canara Bank, a body corporate and Nationalized Bank under the provisions of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970 with its Head Office at J C Road, Bangalore and amongst other a Branch Office at Sri Muktsar Sahib, Tehsil & District Sri Muktsar Sahib through its Constituted Attorney Sh. Inderjeet Brar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Malkeet Singh son of Sh. Bhag Singh resident of Village Chak Madrassa, Tehsil and District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

¶10

Sh. Amandeep Singh son of Sh. Malkeet Singh resident of Village Chakk Madrassa, Tehsil and District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Present: Ms. Seerat Sharma, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pankaj Beri, 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 & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.30,38,798.96p (Rupees Thirty Lacs Thirty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety Eight & Paise Ninety Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Inderjeet Brar, Constituted Attorney of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 05.01.2018, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs & Agri. Term Loan of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Loan applications dated

¶18

2 OA NO.606/2025 CANARA BANK VS SH. MALKEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶19

26.02.2018, which are Annexures A3 & A8 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs & Agri. Term Loan of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Sanction letters dated 07.03.2018, which are Annexures A4 and A9 to this OA the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant no.1 mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. land measuring 55K-18M (6Acre 7Kanal 18Marla) situated at Village Chakk Madrassa, Tehsil and District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 12.02.2018, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed: -Amalgamation notification dated 04.03.2020, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Agreements for agriculture advances, Agreements, Deeds of guarantee executed by defendant no.2, DP Note, all dated 07.03.2018, which are Annexures A5 to A7, A10 to A13 to this OA; Notice dated 01.04.2025, which is Annexure A15 to this OA and Statements of accounts, which are Annexures A16 & A17 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.30,38,798.96p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

The defendants were served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 14.11.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Inderjeet Brar, Constituted Attorney, Canara Bank, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 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

¶25

3 OA NO.606/2025 CANARA BANK VS SH. MALKEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶26

Annexures A1 to A17 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants 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.30,38,798.96p(Rupees Thirty Lacs Thirty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety Eight & Paise Ninety Six 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.

¶27

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has interest @11.65%p.a.in KCC & interest @10.10%p.a. in Term loan with half yearly rests from 19.04.2025 till the realization.

¶28

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 defendants, quantum of loans 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.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.30,38,798.96p (Rupees Thirty Lacs Thirty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety Eight & Paise Ninety Six 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

¶30

¶31

OA NO.606/2025

¶32

CANARA BANK VS SH. MALKEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶33

the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged property/hypothecated assets 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. 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 01.12.2025. 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: 19.11.2025

¶34

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶35

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Sh. Malkeet Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh. Malkeet Singh 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

Messrs Rosy Hi Tech Spinning Mills and Others versus Punjab National Bank

Gaurav Chandola and Another versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Jai Jeet Enterprises and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Another

Central Bank of India versus M/S Paras Traders and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Sher Singh and Another