Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sukhvinder Singh and Another

DRT1 Nov 2025OA/79/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant's original application for recovery of a housing loan amount of approximately Rs. 36.26 Lakhs against two respondents, one principal debtor and one guarantor. The court adjusted the interest rate to 8% per annum and ordered issuance of a recovery certificate for attachment of assets.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs. 36,26,158.91p with interest @08% p.a. and authorization to attach personal assets after issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sukhvinder Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.79/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 30.12.2021

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 01.11.2025

¶6

Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) a Government of India undertaking incorporated under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 and having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Backbay Reclamation, Nariman Point, Mumbai, carrying on the business of banking at various places, throughout India including a branch at Landran, SAS Nagar through Sh. Munish Sharda, Branch Manager/Principal Officer/General Attorney, Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Andhra Bank), Landran, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Sukhvinder Singh S/o Sh. Jit Singh R/o Village Morian Post Office Passi Kandi, Dasuya, Hoshiarpur-144205.

¶9

Sh. Amandeep Singh S/o Sh. Mohan Lal, H.No. 1089, Gillco Heights, Gillco Valley, Kharar-146001, District Mohali, Punjab.

¶10

…….Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Gaurav Chadda, Advocate for the applicant Defendants already ex parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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. 36,26,158.91p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Six Thousand One Hundred Fifty Eight and Paise Ninety One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Munish Sharda, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is

¶15

¶16

OA NO. 79/2022 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUKHVINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶17

competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 27.02.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 had approached the applicant for grant of Housing Loan of Rs. 33.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 08.01.2018, which is Annexure A3 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs. 33.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 24.01.2018, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶20

Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Residential property situated at Plot no. 52, measuring 22/3 Marla situated at Mata Gujri Avenue, Village Bhago Majra, Hadbast no. 75,Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Punjab vide Title Deed No. 15/2017-18/1/2841 dated 24.01.2018 along with its translation, which are Annexures A14 & A15 to this OA; Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed dated 25.01.2018, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Jamabandi for year 2013-14 along with its translation, which are Annexures A16 & A17 to this OA.

¶21

On 28.08.2025, the learned counsel for applicant submitted that the above mortgaged property was already sold by the applicant under SARFAESI proceedings. As per affidavit of Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Chief Manager of applicant filed on 03.09.2025 vide diary no. 13978 in compliance to order dated 28.08.2025, the above property was sold by the applicant in auction held on 27.10.2023 and an amount of Rs. 20.25 Lacs was realized and was appropriated towards the outstanding dues on 18.01.2024. It was further deposed in the affidavit that the total outstanding in the account of defendants on 31.07.2025 including interest was Rs. 25,78,839.91. Sale certificate dated 18.01.2024, is also filed with the affidavit.

¶22

¶23

OA NO. 79/2022

¶24

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUKHVINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶25

Documents executed:- Reserve Bank of India Notification dated 04.03.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Composite Agreement, Schedule VIII Supplemental to composite agreement, D.P. Note, Consent Letter, Letter of Consent for publication of names in media, Letter of declaration and undertaking, General Form of Guarantee and Letter of Declaration which are Annexures A5 to A12 to this OA; Demand Notice dated 01.09.2021 under section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, along with Postal Receipt which is Annexure A18 to this OA; Statement of account which is Annexure A19 to this OA; Certificate under Bankers Books Evidence Act which is Annexure A20 to this OA and Acknowledgment of debt dated 15.01.2020, which is Annexure A21 to this OA.

¶26

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. 36,26,158.91p, which was 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.

¶27

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 27.08.2025.

¶28

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Munish Sharda, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed.

¶29

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶30

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 A21 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 bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per

¶31

¶32

OA NO. 79/2022

¶33

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUKHVINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶34

terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA.

¶35

On 03.09.2025, an affidavit of Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Chief Manager was filed as per which the mortgaged property was sold by the applicant under SARFAESI proceedings in auction held on 27.10.2023 and an amount of Rs. 20.25 Lacs was realized and was appropriated towards the outstanding dues on 18.01.2024.

¶36

From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 36,26,158.91p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Six Thousand One Hundred Fifty Eight and Paise Ninety One Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from 30.12.2021 (i.e. the date of filing of the present Original Application) to 17.01.2024 and a sum of Rs.16,01,158.91p (Rupees Sixteen Lac One Thousand One Hundred Fifty Eight and Nine Paise Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from 18.01.2024 till realization of the account.

¶37

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @09.50%p.a. with monthly rests from 01.11.2021 till the realization.

¶38

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 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

¶39

¶40

OA NO. 79/2022

¶41

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SUKHVINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶42

realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶43

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum Rs. 36,26,158.91p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Twenty Six Thousand One Hundred Fifty Eight and Paise Ninety One Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from 30.12.2021 to 17.01.2024 and a sum of Rs.16,01,158.91p (Rupees Sixteen Lac One Thousand One Hundred Fifty Eight and Nine Paise Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from 18.01.2024 till realization of the account. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶44

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 12.11.2025. 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.

¶45

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶46

Dated: 01.11.2025

¶47

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶48

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sukhvinder Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Sukhvinder 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 Gramin Bank versus Sh. Rinku Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Waho Waho Enterprises and Others

Central Bank of India versus M/S Deepika Enterprises and Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Sharman Ji Impo Expo and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Mangal Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Lakhbir Kaur and Others