Allowed

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Hardeep Singh and Another

DRT20 Jan 2025OA/759/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed an original application filed by IDBI Bank Ltd. for recovery of a defaulted agricultural loan. Defending ex-parte, the claimers sought principal recovery, costs, and interest. The court ordered payment of the principal sum with costs and granted simple interest at 8% per annum instead of the claimed rate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of principal Rs. 36,31,556 with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Enforcement via SARFAESI Act permitted.

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Hardeep Singh and Another — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.759/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 31.01.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 20.01.2025

¶6

IDBI Bank Ltd., company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) and a company within the meaning of section 2 (20) of the Companies Act, 2013 and a banking company within the meaning of Section 5 (c) of the Banking regulations Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) and having its registered office at IDBI Tower, W.T.C. Complex, Cuffee Parade Mumbai-400005 and having a Branch Office Amongst others at SCO No.38, Beant Singh Market, Aman Nagar-II, Bela Road, Roop Nagar district Roop Nagar-140001 (Punjab) through Ms. Shuchi Khurmi, BH/AGM and Authorized signatory of IDBI Bank Ltd.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. Sh. Hardeep Singh S/o Sh. Balwinder Singh R/o House No.51, Village Doomchheri, Tehsil Morinda, District Roop Nagar, Punjab-140101.

¶10

2. Sh. Mahesh Kumar S/o Sh. Kamal Lal R/o House no.#809, Ward NO.6, Sood Colony, Morinda, District Roop Nagar, Punjab140101.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Ram Pal Khole, Advocate proxy for Sh. Tajender K. Joshi, 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 Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.36,31,556.00p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Thirty One Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Six only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Shuchi Khurmi, BH/AGM and Authorized signatory, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide DOP, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 10.03.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Letter of Intent dated 16.03.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 23K-06M situated at Village Baihibalpur, Hadbast no.260, Tehsil Morinda, District Roop Nagar vide Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 13.03.2015 and Letter to Sub registrar for Making entry of agriculture loan, along with its Translations, which is Annexures A4 to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed:-Deed of Hypothecation, Guarantee Agreement, Demand Promissory Note, Take Delivery Letter to DPN all dated 16.03.2015, which are Annexures A5 to A8 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 30.11.2021, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Guarantee Invocation Notice dated 27.12.2021, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and statement of Account, which is Annexure A11 to this OA.

¶20

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.36,31,556.00p, 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 09.01.2025.

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Shuchi Khurmi, BH/AGM and Authorized signator y, IDBI Bank Ltd., has been filed. 8. Heard 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,

¶22

¶23

the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A11 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. 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.36,31,556.00p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Thirty One Thousand Five Hundred Fifty 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 account.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. along with penal interest @2.00%p.a. from 07.01.2022 till the realization.

¶25

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 @8.00%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.

¶26

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.36,31,556.00p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Thirty One Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Six only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the

¶27

¶28

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.

¶29

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 01.03.2025. 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: 20.01.2025.

¶30

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

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Hardeep Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Hardeep 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

Punjab National Bank versus Manoj Kumar

Icici Bank Limited versus Jagjit Singh and Others

Central Bank of India versus Jagtar Singh and Another

Indian Bank versus Karamjit Singh and Another

Bank of India versus Balvir Singh and Another

Canara Bank versus M/S Shivalik Tech and Another