Allowed

Bank of India v. Makhan Singh and Another

DRT20 Jan 2025OA/935/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed under Section 19 of the RDBFIA by Bank of India to recover a loan of Rs. 27.97 lakh from two defendants. The Tribunal modified the claimed interest rate to 8% per annum and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs. 27.97 lakh with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a., issuing a Recovery Certificate, and directing parties to appear before the Recovery Officer.

Bank of India versus Makhan Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.935/2023 PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 22.07.2023

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 20.01.2025

¶5

Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act No. V of 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House” C-5, Block-G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and Branch Office amongst other places, at Sirhind Road, Patiala (Punjab), through its duly constituted attorney, Sh. Sunil Kumar, Chief Manager, Rajpura, District Patiala (Punjab).

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Makhan Singh S/o Sh. Ishar Singh, R/o Village Bhanri, PO Wazidpur, Tehsil & District Patiala (Punjab-147101)

¶9

Sh. Nahar Singh S/o Sh. Sahib Singh, R/o Village Sainsarwal, Tehsil & District Patiala (Punjab-147202)

¶10

….……Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Ms. Meena Malhotra, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.27,97,555.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Five only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sunil Kumar, Chief Manager, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 20.02.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of Kisan Credit Card Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs and Agricultural Overdraft of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide Loan Applications dated

¶16

¶17

24.02.2016, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA. Defendant No.2 stood as a Guarantor.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the Kisan Credit Card Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs and Agricultural Overdraft of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 01.03.2016, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 18 Bigha situated at Village Bhanri, Hadbast No. 169, Tehsil & District Patiala vide Declaration of Mortgage and Letter to Sub-Registrar bearing vasika No. 3433 both dated 25.02.2016, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA. Documents executed:- Copies of Demand Promissory Note, Copies of Deed of Hypothecation, Copies of Consolidated/Multipurpose Stamped Undertaking, Copies of Miscellaneous undertakings/declarations and Copy of Deed of Guarantee all dated 01.03.2016, which are Annexures A7A, A8 to A14 to this OA; Copies of Acknowledgements of Debt dated 08.05.2018 and 02.09.2020, which are Annexures A15 to A18 to this OA; Recall Notices and Postal Receipts dated 11.07.2023, which are Annexures A19 to A21 to this OA and Statement of account along with statement of uncharged interest, duly certified under Banker’s Books Evidence Act, 1891 dated 12.07.2023, which are Annexures A22 & A23 to this OA. 5. The loans account became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.27,97,555.00, 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. 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 25.06.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sunil Kumar, Chief Manager, Bank of India, h as been filed.

¶19

¶20

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶21

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 A23 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.27,97,555.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Five 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.

¶22

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @13.50%p.a. with half yearly rests from 13.07.2023 till the realization.

¶23

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 both 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.27,97,555.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Five only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from

¶24

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

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

Bank of India v. Makhan Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Makhan 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