Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Kulwinder Kaur

DRT5 Feb 2026OA/101/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I Chandigarh allowed Union Bank of India's application under Section 19 RDB Act for recovery of Rs.40.29 lakhs plus interest. The court recorded that the bank proved the loan advance and the defendants failed to repay. Recovery was directed from mortgaged property and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.40,29,016.66 with interest at 12.75% annum; issue of Recovery Certificate; directions to sale of mortgaged land.

Union Bank of India versus Kulwinder Kaur — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 101/2023 Date of Institution: 16.11.2022 Date of Decision: 05.02.2026

¶4

Union Bank of India having its branches all over India and a branch at Adampur, Doaba Branch, Main Road, Near Miglani Hospital, Adampur, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Kulwinder Kaur w/o Sh. Kulwinder Singh, r/o Village and P.O. Pandari Khangura, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶8

Amarjit Singh s/o Sh. Arjan Singh, r/o Village and P.O. Pandori Khangura, Tehsil and Distt. Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Ms. Lovedeep Kaur proxy counsel for Ms. Karuna Kumari Dogra, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 28.11.2024 .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.40,29,016.66p with interest @12.75% per annum with yearly rests from 16.11.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Union Bank of India has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.40,29,016.66p with interest against Smt. Kulwinder Kaur and another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 23.07.2013, it had granted a loan of Rs.40.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No. 1 had mortgaged her land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor vide deed of guarantee dated 29.07.2013. The

¶16

¶17

loan was chargeable to interest @12.75% per annum with yearly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 07.09.2017. On 13.10.2022, a sum of Rs.40,29,016.66p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 25.01.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 28.11.2024, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶19

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Gurmeet Singh, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-20.

¶20

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.40.00 Lacs and on 13.10.2022, a sum of Rs.40,29,016.66p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.40,29,016.66p (Rupees Forty Lacs Twenty Nine Thousand Sixteen and Paise Sixty Six Only) with interest @12.75% per annum with yearly rests from 16.11.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶21

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 13.03.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the

¶22

¶23

mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 05.02.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Union Bank of India v. Kulwinder Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Kulwinder Kaur

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

State Bank of India versus Mrs Satpal Kaur

Icici Bank Limited versus Nur Aliya represented by legal heir Tajkar Ali

MD Fariuddin Akhtar versus Axis Bank Limited

Narinderpal Singh versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Ismail Fly Ash Bricks and Anr.

Icici Bank Limited versus Vikas Sharma