Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Rakesh Singh Pundir

DRT6 Aug 2025TA/48/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I, Delhi allowed the original application filed by Punjab National Bank for recovery of dues against respondents who defaulted on an housing loan. The bank proved its case via documents without any rebuttal as respondents appeared ex-parte, leading to an order for payment without further hearings on merits.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are directed to pay Rs.67,76,083.37/- along with interest @9.25% per annum and costs. Recovery shall be from the sale of the mortgaged apartment or defendant properties.

Punjab National Bank versus Rakesh Singh Pundir — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 48 of 2023

¶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.48 of 2023

¶5

Punjab National Bank Plot No. 4, Sector- 10, Dwarka, New Delhi

¶6

Also at:

¶7

Gurudwara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi- 110005

¶8

Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

Sh. Rakesh Singh Pundir S/o Rajendra Singh Pundir

¶11

House No. 1004, Ground Floor, Sector- 5, Wave City, Ghaziabad, UP- 201001

¶12

Also at:

¶13

CSC, Computer Science Corporation, A-44/45, Sector- 62, Noida, UP

¶14

Also at:

¶15

Flat No. 1218, Tower- E, Ashiana LE-Residency, Golf Link NH- 24, Ghaziabad, UP- 201002

¶16

Also at:

¶17

H.No. 40/3, Block- 3, Bhandari Bagh, Dehradun- 248001

¶18

Smt. Neetu Pundir W/o Shr. Rakesh Singh Pundir Flat No. 1218, Tower- E, Ashiana LE-Residency, Golf Link NH- 24, Ghaziabad, UP- 201002

¶19

M/S Kaveri Sehkari Awas Samiti Ltd.

¶20

T.A. No. 48 of 2023

¶21

303, Devika Tower Chander Nagar, Ghaziabad, UP- 201011

¶22

Also at: D-237, IIIrd Floor, Vivek Vihar, Phase- 1, Delhi Defendants

¶23

Present: Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Pandey, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶24

Date of Institution: 27.03.2019

¶25

Date of Pronouncement: 06.08.2025

¶26

FINAL ORDER

¶27

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-III, Delhi on 27.03.2019 and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi, through Sh. Rokhu LovingSon, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.67,76,083.37/- (Rupees Sixty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Eighty Three and Paisa Thirty Seven only), as on 31.03.2019 along with pendente lite and future interest @9.25% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs.

¶28

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant No. 1 and 2 vide their loan application dated 16.02.2015, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan facility vide sanction letter dated 27.02.2015 for a sum of Rs.48,75,000/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Seventy Five Thousand only) @10.25% floating interest per annum plus

¶29

T.A. No. 48 of 2023

¶30

©2% penal charge with monthly rests to be repayable in 360 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.51,328.99/- (Rupees Fifty One Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Eight and Paisa Ninety Nine Only) each in order to purchase an apartment bearing no. Red/1204 was allotted in IRDIA situated at Village Illahbas, Sector- 86, Noida, UP which was allotted by defendant no. 3 vide Allotment Letter dated 20.09.2014, against equitable mortgage of the said flat.

¶31

In order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendants submitted loan application dated 16.02.2015 and executed Sanction Letter dated 27.02.2015. Further Defendant No. 3 issued Letter of Undertaking dated 20.02.2015, NOC Letter dated 22.02.2015, Tripartite Agreement dated 27.02.2015 Allotment Letter dated 20.09.2014 and Balance Confirmation Letter dated 04.04.2016.

¶32

That in order to secure the housing loan facility, the defendants created equitable mortgage by submitting the title deeds of an apartment bearing no. Red/1204 was allotted in IRDIA situated at Village Illahbas, Sector- 86, Noida, UP with the applicant bank on 22.02.2015.

¶33

As per Tripartite Agreement dated 27.02.2015 executed by defendants with the applicant bank, it was agreed that if borrowers withdraws from the scheme or fails to pay the balance amount representing the difference between the housing loan allowed by the bank and the actual cost of the flat or die or allotment of the property is cancelled, the entire amount outstanding to the credit of the borrowers will be refunded by Defendant no.3 to the applicant bank.

¶34

T.A. No. 48 of 2023

¶35

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to deposit regular EMIs in the account to regularize the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 30.06.2018 as per RBI guidelines also issued a Loan Demand Notice dated 20.06.2017, Notice of Default dated 20.03.2018, 25.04.2018 and 26.05.2018, legal recall notice dated 21.06.2018 and Legal Demand Notice dated 27.07.2018 but the defendants neglected the same and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶36

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 16.04.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant. '

¶37

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Rokhu LovingSon as authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney, Loan Application, Sanction Letter, Letter of Undertaking, Copy of NOC, Tripartite Agreement, Allotment Letter, Balance Confirmation Letter, Loan demand notice, NPA Certificate, Recall Notice, Legal Demand Notice, and Statement of Accounts duly certified under Bankers Books Evidence Act as EXHIBIT AW-1/1 to EXHIBIT AW 1/15.

5d-

T.A. No. 48 of 2023

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 approved.

¶42

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.

¶43

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

¶44

ORDER

¶45

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.67,76,083.37/- (Rupees Sixty Seven Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Eighty Three and Paisa Thirty Seven only), as on 31.03.2019 along with pendent lite and future interest @9.25% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs; failing which the amount shall be recovered from sale of mortgaged apartment bearing no. Red/1204 was allotted in IRDIA situated at Village Illahbas, Sector- 86, Noida, UP. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶46

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

¶47

Sd-

¶48

T.A. No. 48 of 2023

¶49

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 13.10.2025.

¶50

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

¶51

5ncfr

¶52

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

¶53

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 06.08.2025

¶54

Punjab National Bank v. Rakesh Singh Pundir

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Rakesh Singh Pundir

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S Regan Engg Solutions

Punjab National Bank versus Jokhan Singh and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Jyotsna Kisan Seva Kendra and Ors.

Canara Bank versus M/S M.S. Industries

State Bank of India versus Sandeep Thapa

Ms Shastri Agarbatties Private Limited versus Tata Capital Limited