Allowed

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sukwhinder Kaur

DRT11 Nov 2025OA/836/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I Chandigarh allowed an application for recovery of Rs.49,96,221/- with interest against Sukhwinder Kaur in an ex parte proceeding. The court found the bank proved its loan advance and subsequent default, permitting recovery via sale of mortgaged land and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed for recovery of Rs.49,96,221/- with interest. Recovery Certificate issued. Recovery via sale of mortgaged land, standing crops, and personal properties directed.

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sukwhinder Kaur — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 836 of 2022 Date of Institution: 18.04.2022 Date of Decision: 11.11.2025

¶4

Punjab Gramin Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Baghpur, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sukwhinder Kaur w/o Sh. Hakumat Rai, r/o Village Katian P.O. Bhikowal, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Sh. Karan Dev Ray proxy counsel for Sh. Bhushan Bhatia, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶11

Defendant - ex parte vide order dated .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.49,96,221/- with interest @10.35% per annum with yearly rests from 18.04.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Punjab Gramin Bank (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.49,96,221/- with interest against Sukhwinder Kaur (defendant).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 03.12.2012, it had enhanced the exiting limit to Rs.20.00Lacs to defendant in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged her land (fully detailed in para No.5.6 of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.35% per annum with yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 03.03.2014, 14.09.2016, 01.03.2019 and 13.09.2021. On 31.03.2022, a sum of Rs.49,96,221/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶16

¶17

On 23.05.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 02.09.2024, she was proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Akash Kumar, Authorised Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-12. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.20.00Lacs and on 31.03.2022, a sum of Rs.49,96,221/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.49,96,221/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Ninety Six Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty One Only) with interest @10.35% per annum with yearly rests from 18.04.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.5.6 of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant.

¶18

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 16.12.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the party. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 11.11.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶19

MANOJ KALRA

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sukwhinder Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab Gramin Bank v. Sukwhinder Kaur

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

Md Danish Sultan versus Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank)

Smt S Meena versus State Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus Jarnail Singh

Idbi Bank versus Mr. Ashish Sharma

Union Bank of India versus lingaraju

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Kala Singh