Allowed

Bank of India v. Om Pal Singh

DRT17 Jun 2025TA/3271/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by Bank of India for recovery of a housing loan default. The defendant was removed and proceeded ex-parte. The court directed payment of principal, interest, and costs, with the mortgaged property as security.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued directing payment of Rs.63,26,471/- plus interest within 30 days; default leads to sale of mortgaged property.

Bank of India versus Om Pal Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.3271 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. 3271 of 2022

¶5

Bank of India

¶6

3E/4, Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi-110055

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Om Pal Singh s/o Chander Pal Singh 7, University Road

¶10

Adjoint International Guest House Delhi International, New Delhi-110007

¶11

Defendant

¶12

Present: Shri Ashish Rana, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶13

Date of Institution: 22.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 17.06.2025

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 22.04.2021 before DRT-III, Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Shashi Bhushan Chaubey, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.63,26,471/- (Rupees Sixty Three Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Four Hundred Seventy One only) as on 05.04.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @8.80% per annum with

Sir

T.A. No.3271 of 2022

monthly rests plus @2% penal interest from the date of filing this application till the date of its realization and costs.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant vide loan application dated 04.06.2014, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan of Rs.56,00,000/(Rupees Fifty Six Lacs only) on 06.06.2014 which was to be repayable in 255 EMI of Rs.53,817/- for purchasing under construction Flat/Unit No.T-2201, 22n floor, Tower/Block T, Amrapali Heartbeat City-2, admeasuring 1350 sq. feet at GH01/D, Sector-107, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. Further, on the request of the defendant, the applicant bank reviewed and upgraded the loan account from NPA to standard, and applicant bank received an amount from Rs.20276.90 on 27.07.2017 and an amount of Rs.662.10 on 28.08.2017 but again the account was declared as NPA on 31.12.2017. The Defendant also agreed to pay penal interest @2% in case of delay or default.

¶21

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant submitted Loan Application dated 04.06.2014 and executed Loan Agreement, Affidavit cum Undertaking, Acknowledgement letter, Special Power of Attorney with the applicant bank on 27.08.2014. The defendant executed Tripartite Agreement with applicant and the builder/promoter on 26.08.2014 and builder issued Permission to Mortgage dated 26.08.2014 in favour of applicant.

¶22

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendant created mortgage of the Flat No.T-2201, 22n floor, Tower/Block-T, Amrapali Heartbeat City-21 admeasuring (super area) of 1350 sq. feet at GH-01/D, Sector-107, Noida, Gautam

5d-

T.A. No.3271 of 2022

Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh 201301 on the basis of No Objection Letter dated 26.08.2014 issued by the builder with the applicant bank.

¶27

The defendant executed Acknowledgement of Debt thereby acknowledging the debt towards the applicant bank on 30.05.2017.

¶28

As per Tripartite Agreement dated 22.08.2014 executed by defendant with applicant bank, it was agreed that in case of termination or cancellation of the agreement for any reason whatsoever, the builder shall pay and remit the entire outstanding dues against the defendant to the applicant bank.

¶29

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant failed to maintain financial discipline and comply with the terms and conditions of loan despite several requests and reminders and defaulted in payment of monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified housing loan account as NPA on 31.03.2016, upgraded to Standard category on 30.12.2016 and then again on 31.12.2017. The applicant bank issued legal demand notice on 30.04.2016 to clear the dues but defendant neglected to return the amount as per agreement, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶30

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 17.10.2024, defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶31

¶32

T.A. No.3271 of 2022

¶33

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Shashi Bhushan Chaubey, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/1, Home Loan Application form Ex.AW-1/2, Allotment cum Flat Buyer Agreement Ex.AW-1/3„ Sanction letter Ex.AW-1/4, Permission to mortgage Ex.AW-1/5, Home Loan Agreement Ex.AW-1/6, Affidavit cum Undertaking Ex.AW-1/6, Affidavit cum Undertaking Ex.AW-1/7, Acknowledgment letter Ex.AW-1/8, Special Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/9, Tripartite agreement Ex.AW-1/10, Banker's cheque Ex.AW-1/11, Letter dated 02.04.2016 Ex.AW-1/12, Invocation Letter Ex.AW-1/13, Demand notice Ex.AW-1/14, Notice of Wilful Defaulter Ex.AW1/15, Letter of Acknowledgement Ex.AW-1/16, Hon'ble Supreme Court order dated 23.07.2019 Ex.AW-1/17, Hon'ble Supreme Court order dated 10.06.2020 Ex.AW-1/18, Memorandum of Understanding Ex.AW-1/19, Email dated 07.12.2020 Ex.AW-1/20, Letter dated 13.08.2020 Ex.AW-1/21, Letter dated 06.04.2021 Ex.AW-1/22, Banker's Books Evidence Act Ex.AW-1/23.

¶34

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.

¶35

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.

¶36

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

T.A. No.3271 of 2022

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.63,26,471.90 (Rupees Sixty Three Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Four Hundred Seventy One and Paisa Ninety only) along with pendentelite and future interest @10.80% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till its realization with costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged Flat/Unit No. T-2201, 22n floor at Tower/Block T, Amrapali Heartbeat City-2, admeasuring (super area) of 1350 sq. feet at GH-01/D, Sector-107, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201301. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶41

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

¶42

(III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 18.08.2025.

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 17.06.2025

¶46

Bank of India v. Om Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Om Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anish Anakkal Balan versus Idbi Bank

Ms B S Dhatu Pvt. Ltd. Director Dilip Satynarayan Agrawal versus Indian Bank

Jyotsna Chakraborty Das versus Canara Bank

Mammu v versus Punjab National Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Aniraj Chauhan

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Poonam Industries