Allowed

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Narender Singh Thakur

DRT13 May 2025TA/2701/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I, Delhi allowed a Transfer Application filed by Punjab and Sind Bank for recovery of a vehicle loan default totaling Rs. 15,14,084.60 plus interest against two defendants who were absent ex-parte, directing execution of the recovery certificate. The units assigned were money-laundering, banking-and-recovery, and cheque-dishonour.

What did the court decide?

Ordered payment of Rs. 15,14,084.60 with interest at 11.95% per annum within 30 days or recovery from sale of hypothecated vehicle and assets.

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Narender Singh Thakur — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.2701 of 2022

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 2701 of 2022

¶5

Punjab and Sind Bank D-3/14, Lal Quarter Block-D, Krishna Nagar Delhi-110051 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sh. Narender Singh Thakur S/o Sh.Manohar Lal 51-D, Pocket-R, Dilshad Garden Delhi-95

¶8

Also at: 51-D, Pocket R, Dilshad Garden Delhi-110095

¶9

Also at: A-138, Backside, Dilshad Colony, Delhi-95 2. Sh. Ajeet Singh S/o Sh. Jai Chand Singh 232-B, Pocket-L Dilshad Garden, Delhi Also at: S-27, Commercial Complex DLF, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Defendants

¶10

Present: Ms Chitra Malhotra, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 28.12.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 13.05.2025

¶11

T.A. No.2701 of 2022

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 28.12.2018 before DRT-II, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-III through Sh.Roshan Lal, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.15,14,084.60 (Rupees Fifteen Lacs Fourteen Thousand Eighty Four and Paisa Sixty only) along with pendentelite and future interest @9.95% per annum with monthly rest together with @2% penal interest from date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs. Further, the name of Shri Anjul Jaiswal was substituted as authorized representative in place of Sh.Rohan Lal, erstwhile ARs for the applicant bank.

¶14

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 vide loan application dated 08.11.2014, the applicant bank sanctioned Vehicle Loan facility of Rs.13,00,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lacs only) on 26.11.2014 @10.50% floating rate of interest with monthly rests to be repayable in 60 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs:7,942/in order to purchase vehicle namely Mahindra Scorpio Car against hypothecation. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor for auto facility availed by defendant no.1.

¶15

That in order to avail the Vehicle Loan facility, the Defendant no.1 submitted Loan Application and executed Certificate of Execution of Document, Demand Promissory Note, Form no.200, Form no.103/291/412, Form no.106, Form no.216, Form no.199 Undertaking, Form No.192 Hypothecation

¶16

T.A. No.2701 of 2022

¶17

of Goods, Form No.256(R), Undertaking on 27.11.2014 in favour of the applicant bank. In addition, the defendant executed Revival Letter dated 09.11.2017 with the applicant bank.

¶18

That in order to secure the loan facility, the defendant no.1 hypothecated vehicle namely Mahindra Scorpio car having Registration No. DL8CAK2591 in favour of the applicant bank on 27.11.2014.

¶19

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the vehicle loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite several requests and defendants failed to pay outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. The applicant bank sent various notices and reminders requesting the defendants to regularize the account but defendants have failed to comply with the notices. The account was declared as NPA on 31.03.2017 and issued legal notice dated 27.11.2017 but neglected by the defendants. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶20

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service through publication in newspapers, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 27.02.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit oi assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶21

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Anjul Jaiswal, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the

¶22

T.A. No.2701 of 2022

¶23

documents as Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/1, Guarantor details Ex.AW-1/2, Sanction letter Ex.AW-1/3, Demand Promissory Note Ex.AW-1/4, Revival Letter Ex.AW-1/5, Form No.103/291/412 Ex.AW-1/6, Form no.106 Ex.AW-1/7, Revised clauses pertaining to rate of interest Ex.AW-1/8, Form no.192 (RR) Hypothecation of Goods Ex.AW-1/9, Undertakings Ex.AW1/10 & Ex.AW-1/11, Legal notice Ex.AW-1/12, Certified copy of Statement of Account along with Certificate under Section 2A Ex.AW-1/13 and Ex.AW-1/14.

¶24

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶25

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶26

In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶27

ORDER

¶28

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.15,14,084.60 (Rupees Fifteen Lacs Fourteen Thousand Eighty Four and Paisa Sixty only) along with pendentelite and future interest @11.95% per annum with

¶29

T.A. No.2701 of 2022

¶30

monthly rests and costs from date of filing of this application failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated vehicle namely Mahindra Scorpio Car having Registration No. DL8CAK2591. In case of shortfall the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶31

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, DeIA.

¶32

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 11.07.2025.

¶33

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶34

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶35

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 13.05.2025

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Narender Singh Thakur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab and Sind Bank v. Narender Singh Thakur

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

Mr Tapas Mondal versus Punjab National Bank

Kaushik Paul versus Punjab National Bank

Bank of India versus Mahesh

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ramandeep Singh

State Bank of India versus Roy K Jose

State Bank of India versus Jaspinder Singh