Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Anmolpreet Singh Sandhu

DRT9 Jul 2025OA/685/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Union Bank of India filed an original application under Section 19 RDBFIA for recovery of a loan of approx. 38 lakhs against Anmolpreet Singh Sandhu. The defendant, being absent, was tried ex parte. The Tribunal allowed the application, deemed 8% p.a. simple interest appropriate, and ordered recovery via sale of hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Debt of Rs.38,41,249.50 with interest at 8% p.a. from filing date till realization ordered to be recovered by sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

Union Bank of India versus Anmolpreet Singh Sandhu — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.685/2025 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 29.05.2025

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 09.07.2025

¶5

Union Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the banking companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Central Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400021 and inter alia a Branch Office at G.T. Road, Malout, District Muktsar Sahib, Punjab through its Branch Manager/Authorized Officer Sh. Rajkamal Saini.

¶6

……..Applicant Versus

¶7

Sh. Anmolpreet Singh Sandhu S/o Sh. Jaspinder Singh R/o Adarsh Nagar, Street No.1, ward no.1, Malout, District Muktsar Punjab.

¶8

….……Defendant

¶9

Advocates:

¶10

Argued by Ms. Ramneek Kaur, Advocate proxy for Sh. Sumeet Sehgal, Advocate for the applicant Defendant 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.38,41,249.50p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty One Thousand Two Hundred Forty Nine & Fifty Paise Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rajkamal Saini, Branch Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶13

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant bank for the grant of AGC Limit of Rs.34.05 Lacs vide Loan application, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶14

2 OA NO.685-2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS ANMOLPREET SINGH SANDHU

¶15

The applicant Bank sanctioned the AGC Limit of Rs.34.05 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 24.01.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant had hypothecated its movable properties/assets i.e. Two unit of new Straw Baler along with 2 unit of Straw Rakes, Straw Reaper cum Chopper and 1 unit of Rotary Slasher vide Tax Invoice dated 16.03.2023 & 23.11.2023 and SD 19 Term loan agreement and Hypothecation agreement dated 24.01.2023, which are Annexures A4, A6 A16 to A18 to this OA.

¶16

Documents executed:- SD 19 Term loan agreement, Demand Promissory note, Hypothecation agreement, Simple loan agreement, Declaration/undertaking, Letter of continuity, Letter of Undertaking, Format, Format-II, Interest agreement all dated 24.01.2023, which are Annexures A5, A7 to A13 to this OA; Letter of confirmation, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; DPR Templates for projects dated 20.01.2023, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Notice dated 20.12.2024 along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A19 & A20 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A21 to this OA

¶17

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.38,41,249.50p, which is recoverable and the defendant was 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 07.07.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rajkamal Saini, Branch manager, Union Bank of India, h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record

¶18

3 OA NO.685-2025

¶19

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS ANMOLPREET SINGH SANDHU

¶20

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 Annexures A1 to A21 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.38,41,249.50p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty One Thousand Two Hundred Forty Nine & Fifty Paise Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶21

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. plus penal interest @2.00%p.a. from 01.04.2025 till the realization.

¶22

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 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.

¶23

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.38,41,249.50p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lacs Forty One Thousand Two

¶24

4 OA NO.685-2025

¶25

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS ANMOLPREET SINGH SANDHU

¶26

Hundred Forty Nine & Fifty Paise Only) 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 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. 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 29.07.2025. 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: 09.07.2025. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Anmolpreet Singh Sandhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Anmolpreet Singh Sandhu

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

Punjab National Bank versus Mohan Singh and Another

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Balwinder Kaur and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Jarnail Singh and Others

Bank of India versus Late Smt. Shakuntla Devi and Another

Union Bank of India versus Ms Mahadev Industries and another

Bank of India versus Malkit Singh and Others