Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Tarsem Singh

DRT16 Jan 2026OA/1187/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Punjab National Bank for the recovery of Rs. 20,44,698/- with interest from Tarsem Singh. Dunsatisfied by the defendant's failure to mortgage land promised as security and defaulting on payments, the Tribunal upheld the bank's recovery order.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 20,44,698/- with interest and costs; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale of mortgaged land directed.

Punjab National Bank versus Tarsem Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1187/2022 Date of Institution: 02.06.2022 Date of Decision: 16.01.2026

¶4

Punjab National Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Qadian Road, Batala, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Tarsem Singh s/o Sh. Paramjit Singh, r/o Village Chahal Kalan, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Sh. Ankit Kaushal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 14.02.2023 .

¶10

OA for the Recovery of Rs.20,44,698/- with interest @8.80% per annum with yearly rests from 02.06.2022.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Punjab National Bank has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.20,44,698/- with interest against Sh. Tarsem Singh (defendant).

¶13

Bank’s case is that on 22.02.2014, it had granted a loan of Rs.10.00 Lacs to defendant in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @8.80% per annum with yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 16.01.2017, 16.10.2019 and 28.01.2021. On 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.20,44,698/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶14

¶15

On 06.07.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 14.02.2023, he was proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Naresh Gupta, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11. 5. 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.10.00 Lacs and on 28.02.2022, a sum of Rs.20,44,698/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.20,44,698/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty Four Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Eight Only) with interest @8.80% per annum with yearly rests from 02.06.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. 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 defendant. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 18.02.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the 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 party. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 16.01.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Punjab National Bank v. Tarsem Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Tarsem 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

Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank) versus Rajender Kumar @Chintu

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sarandeep Singh

Assadullah Lone versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Mamta

Mohd Ikramuddin versus Jm Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

MD Ikramuddin versus Piramal Capital Housing Finance Limited