Allowed

Indian Bank v. Daljit Singh and Others

DRT12 Feb 2025OA/796/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application by Indian Bank for recovery of Rs.57,40,083. Heard arguments, noted unopposed documentary evidence. Ordered recovery of principal, costs, and future simple interest at 8% p.a. Granted recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.57,40,083.00 plus costs and 8% simple interest p.a. from filing date; Recovery Certificate issued.

Indian Bank versus Daljit Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.796/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.06.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 12.02.2025

¶6

Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank) a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 having its Corporate Office at 254-260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Royapettah, Chennai-600014 and a branch amongst SAM branch, Industrial Area-A, near Cheema Chowk, Ludhiana through duly Constituted Attorney Sh. Vikram Singh, Chief Manager presently posted at SAM branch, Industrial Area-A, near Cheema Chowk, Ludhiana.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. Sh. Daljit Singh S/o Sh. Maninder Singh R/o Village Sadarpura, Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶10

2. Sh. Jagdish Singh S/o Sh. Maninder Singh R/o Village Sadarpura, Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶11

3. Sh. Sant Singh S/o Sh. Bhajan Singh R/o Village Sandhua, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Ropar, Punjab.

¶12

….…Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Ms. Lovedeep Kaur, Advocate proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for the Applicant Defendants are ex-parte.

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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.57,40,083.00 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Forty Thousand and Eighty Three Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Vikram Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Letter of Authority dated 20.06.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Loan of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 01.05.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Loan of Rs.30.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 20.05.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant no. 1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Total land measuring 18K-04M situated at Village Malsian Bajan, Sub Tehsil Sidhwa Bett, Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 217 dated 22.05.2014 along with English Translation, which are Annexures A7 & A7T to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed:- General power of Attorney in favour of defendant no. 1 dated 10.04.2014, which is Annexure A1A to this OA; D.P. Note, Hypothecation Agreement, Guarantee Agreement, Consent Letters all dated 11.06.2014, which are Annexures A4 to A6 & A9 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Debt dated 26.11.2018, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 01.03.2018, 03.02.2020, 05.03.2020, 19.06.2020, 02.07.2020, 06.08.2020 and 01.10.2020, along with Postal Receipts, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 12.03.2024, which is Annexure A11 to this OA and Statement of Account with certificate, which is Annexure A12 to this OA.

¶21

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account there was a debit of Rs.57,40,083.00, 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.

¶22

¶23

The defendants were served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 22.01.2025.

¶24

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Vikram Singh, Chief Manager, Indian Bank has been filed.

¶25

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶26

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 A12 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loans 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 loans 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.57,40,083.00 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Forty Thousand and Eighty Three Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @8.55%p.a. plus penal interest @2.00%p.a. with yearly rests from 13.03.2024 till the realization.

¶27

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 loans 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 all

¶28

¶29

the loan accounts 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.57,40,083.00 (Rupees Fifty Seven Lacs Forty Thousand and Eighty Three Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts 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 13.03.2025. 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: 12.02.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Indian Bank v. Daljit Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Daljit Singh 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

Indian Bank versus Messrs Kaura Cold Storage and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Pargat Singh and Others

Axis Bank Limited versus M/S Sidhi Vinayak Agencies and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Skyline Solar Private Limited and Another

Union Bank of India versus M/S Malhotra Cycle Industries and Another

Indian Bank versus Jagdish Singh and Another