Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Sh.Inderjeet Singh

DRT14 Jan 2025TA/82/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of Rs.15,11,265/- plus interest and costs against borrowers and guarantor after evidence remained unrebutted, directing payment within 30 days and issuance of recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs.15,11,265/- with interest and costs within 30 days; issuance of recovery certificate to Recovery Officer, DRT-I, Delhi.

Central Bank of India versus Sh.Inderjeet Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.82 of 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 82 of 2023

¶5

Central Bank of India 119, Shakti Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi-110034 Applicant Versus 1. Sh.Inderjeet Singh 2. Mrs.Parvinder Kaur 3. Sh.Gurmeet Singh All residing at: G-21/03, 2nd Floor, Rajouri Garden New Delhi-110027 4. Sh.Gurmeet Singh WZ-189, First Floor Mukharji Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110018 Defendants Present: Sh. Rajesh Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Institution: 12.04.2019 Date of Pronoui .cement: 14.01.2025 FINAL ORDER

¶6

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 12.04.2019 through Shri Arun Kumar, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of Rs.15,11,265/(Rupees Fifteen Lacs Eleven Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Five

¶7

T.A. No.82 of 2023

¶8

only) as on 10.04.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @11.60% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till its realization and cost.

¶9

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant no.1 to 3 being borrowers/Co-borrowers, the applicant bank sanctioned housing loan facility of Rs.20.00 lacs @10.25% interest to be repayable in 240 EMI of Rs.19,740/for purchasing property at Sham Nagar, Delhi under Cent Home Scheme. The defendant no.4 stood as guarantor for the housing loan facility sanctioned by the applicant bank.

¶10

That in order to avail the said loan facility, defendant no.1 to 3 submitted housing loan application on 05.06.2013 and executed Loan Agreement with Schedule, Consent Letter for CIBIL on 17.06.2013. The defendant no.4 executed Deed of Guarantee for the housing loan availed by defendant no.1 to 3.

¶11

That in order to secure the housing loan facility, the defendants created equitable mortgage by depositing sale deed of residential property i.e. Flat No.C-36, First Floor, Sham Nagar, Vishnu Garden, New Delhi towards housing loan sanctioned by the applicant bank.

¶12

It has been submitted that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite several request letters, the defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the account was declared NPA on 15.08.2014 and issued legal notice dated 10.02.2018 but there was no response from the defendants, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶13

T.A. No.82 of 2023

¶14

Notice under Section 13(2) of thP, Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 dated 21.08.2014 was issued by the applicant bank calling upon the defendants and sold the mortgaged property for Rs.13.60 lacs on 31.08.2016. The applicant bank had appropriated the amount in the account on 27.09.2016 and now approached this tribunal for recovery of remaining dues from the defendants.

¶15

¶16

Notices of this O.A. were issued and served through all modes but defendants did not appear before this tribunal despite publication notice in newspapers. As per order dated 18.10.2024, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶17

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Arun Kumar who have proved the documents as Power of Attorney Exhibit A-1, Loan Application Form Exhibit A-2, Sanction Letter Exhibit A-3, Loan Agreement Exhibit A-4, Consent Letter for CIBIL Exhibit A-5 & A-7, Guarantee Deed Exhibit A-6, Notice under Section 13(2) Exhibit A-8, Legal Notice dated 10.02.2018 Exhibit A-9, Certified Statement of Account under Banker's Book Evidence Act Exhibit A-10.

¶18

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.

¶19

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant 54-

¶20

T.A. No.82 of 2023

¶21

¶22

bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶23

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

¶24

ORDER

¶25

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.15,11,265/- (Rupees Fifteen Lics Eleven Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Five only) along with pendentelite and future interest @11.60% per annum with monthly rest from date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶26

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi. (III) Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 17.03.2025. (IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost. 9d•)-(P°' (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI (Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 14.01.2025

Central Bank of India v. Sh.Inderjeet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Sh.Inderjeet Singh

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

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Hiteshi Enterprises

Central Bank of India versus M/S D.S. Impex

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S the Global Fashion Culture

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Raj Bala Bhardwaj

Canara Bank versus M/S Reenak Footwear

Idfc First Bank Limited versus Patna Clinic and Diagnostic Centre