Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Raj Kumar and Others

DRT8 Oct 2025OA/780/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India against three defendants for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 22,74,279.70p. The court reduced the claimed interest from 12.35% to 8% per annum and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,74,279.70p jointly and severally with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the filing date till realization; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Raj Kumar and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.780/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 15.06.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 08.10.2025

¶6

Union Bank of India, (ECB), A body constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (Act No.5 of 1970) carrying on banking business and having its Central Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 and one of its branch offices at Ishwar Nagar, Near Nanaksar Gurudwara, Devigarh Road, Post Office Saphera, Tehsil and District Patiala, Punjab through its Manager Sh. Davinder Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Raj Kumar S/o Sh. Jagan Nath R/o Village Magar Sahib, PO Massingan, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Ishwar Lal S/o Sh. Jagan Nath R/o Village Magar Sahib, PO Massingan, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala Punjab.

¶11

Sh. Gurmeet Singh S/o Sh. Guljar Singh R/o Village Isherheri, PO Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala Punjab.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by, Ms. Komal Tuteja, Advocate proxy for Sh. Ajay Singla, advocate for Applicant

¶15

Defendants already ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.22,74,279.70p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Nine &

¶18

Seventy Paise only). The Original Application has been filed through

¶19

Sh. Davinder Singh, Branch Manager o f the applicant, who is

¶20

2 OA/780/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶21

competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 14.01.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 & 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 23.05.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Credit Sanction intimation dated 01.07.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶23

Defendant no.1 & 2 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 08 Bigha-00 Biswas situated at Village Magar Sahib, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala, Punjab vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing vasika no.257 dated 29.05.2014, which is Annexure A10 to this OA.

¶24

Documents executed: -Common deed of hypothecation Agreement, Demand Promissory note, Take delivery letter to DPN, Guarantee agreement, Request for overdraft facilities, Letter of undertaking, all dated 01.07.2014, which are Annexures A4 to A9 to this OA; Acknowledgement of debts dated 29.03.2017 & 14.02.2020, which are Annexures A11 & A12 to this OA; Debit Balance Confirmation letter dated 23.11.2021, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Notice dated 24.10.2024, which is Annexure A14 to this OA and Account statement along with certificate, which is Annexure A15 to this OA. 5. 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.22,74,279.70p, 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.

¶25

3 OA/780/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶26

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 04.08.2025.

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Davinder Singh, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, h as 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 Annexures A1 to A15 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.22,74,279.70p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Nine & Seventy Paise only) along with interest from the defendant, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. including 2% penal interest with Half yearly rests from 01.06.2025 till the realization.

¶29

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

¶30

4 OA/780/2025

¶31

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS RAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS

¶32

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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.22,74,279.70p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Nine & Seventy Paise 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 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 21.10.2025. 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: 08.10.2025. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Raj Kumar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Raj Kumar and Others

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 Sh. Karamjit Singh and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Manjeet Singh and Another

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Hardayal Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Smt. Sukhpal Kaur and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Manjit Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Kashmir Singh