Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt. Rupinder Kaur and Another

DRT25 Jul 2025OA/641/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank to recover Rs.21.02 lakh from two borrowers and a guarantor. The bank proved the loan agreement and failure to repay, leading to an order for the recovery certificate and interest reduction.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants ordered to pay Rs.21,02,688.81 with 8% simple interest from date of filing.

Canara Bank versus Smt. Rupinder Kaur and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.641/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.04.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 25.07.2025

¶6

Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), a Body Corporate and Nationalized Bank Constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 with its Head Office at 112, J. C. Road, Bangalore with Branches throughout India and also having Branch at Jhande, Ludhiana Punjab through its Manager and Power of Attorney Smt. Kirti Sharma Wife of Shri Himanshu Sood.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Rupinder Kaur wife of Sh. Dilbagh Singh, Resident of near Ranchi Colony, Threeke Rajguru Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Harmesh Singh Son of Sh. Gurmail Singh Resident of Village Siarh, Tehsil Payal Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶11

…….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Munish Chaudhary, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.21,02,688.81 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Eighty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Manager and Power of Attorney Smt. Kirti Sharma, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 08.08.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

2 OA NO.641/2025

¶17

CANARA BANK VS SMT. RUPINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 had approached the applicant for grant of Housing Loan of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Application dated 19.02.2018, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 16.05.2018 which is Annexure A9 to this OA and terms conditions were accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 had hypothecated her Immovable Properties i.e. House No. 59, Measuring 136 Sq. Yd. situated at V.P.O Jhande Hadbast no. 293, Locality known as Green Ville, Tehsil and District Ludhiana vide equitable mortgage sale Deed bearing vasika no. 13979 dated 09.03.2018, along with its translation which are Annexures A7 and A8 to this OA; Letter regarding handing over the title deed, dated 07.03.2018, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Documents executed:- Gazette Notification dated 04.03.2020, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Housing Loan Agreement, Guarantee Agreement both dated 07.03.2018, which are Annexures A4 and A5 to this OA; AOD dated 30.12.2020, 13.01.2023, 31.01.2025, which are Annexures A10 to A12 to this OA; Notice dated 02.05.2023 U/S 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Statement of Account which is Annexure A14 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan account there was a debit of Rs.21,02,688.81, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 22.07.2025.

¶19

3 OA NO.641/2025 CANARA BANK VS SMT. RUPINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER

¶20

In support of the OA, affidavit of Smt. Kirti Sharma, Manager and Power of Attorney, Canara Bank h as been filed.

¶21

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶22

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 A14 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility 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 loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.21,02,688.81 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Eighty One Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.36%p.a. with monthly rests plus penal interest @2.00% p.a. from 01.03.2025 till the realization.

¶24

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 defendants, 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

¶25

4 OA NO.641/2025

¶26

CANARA BANK VS SMT. RUPINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER

¶27

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

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,02,688.81 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Eighty One Only) jointly and severally, 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/mortgaged properties 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 03.09.2025. 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: 25.07.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Smt. Rupinder Kaur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt. Rupinder Kaur 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Onkar Singh

Messrs Sohan Singh Daljit Singh and Others versus Punjab National Bank and Another

Jasmeet Singh versus Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

State Bank of India versus Sh. Navdeep Singh Sohal and Another

State Bank of India versus Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Others