Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Rajinder Singh Dhaliwal and Another

DRT23 Apr 2026OA/1212/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant's original application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, declaring respondents liable to pay the outstanding amount with interest of 8% p.a. and ordered the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 81,92,946.72 with costs and simple interest @8% p.a. from filing date; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Bank of India versus Sh. Rajinder Singh Dhaliwal and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1212/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.06.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.04.2026

¶6

Bank of India, a Body Corporate under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (5 of 1970) having its Head Office at Star House, Plot No. C-5, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051 and amongst other Branches and one such branch at Jaskirat Complex Jalandhar Road, Kapurthala Branch, Punjab, through Constituted Attorney cum Chief Manager, Sh. Mohit Garg.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Rajinder Singh Dhaliwal son of Sh. Ajit Singh, R/o P atti Jaildara Di, VPO Dhaliwal Bet, Sub Tehsil Dhilwan, District Kapurthala-144804

¶10

Sh. Sarbjit Singh son of Sh. Pargan Singh, R/o Village Padde Bet, PO D haliwal Bet, Sub Tehsil Dhilwan, District Kapurthala-144804

¶11

……. .Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Samjot Singh Thind, Advocate for Applicant

¶14

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 29.01.2026)

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.81,92,946.72 (Rupees Eighty One Lacs Ninety Two Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six and Paise Seventy Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mohit Garg, Chief Manager cum Constituted Attorney of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 20.01.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

2 OA/1212/2025

¶18

BANK OF INDIA VS. RAJINDER SINGH DHALIWAL AND ANOTHER

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for the grant of KCC of Rs.48.50 Lacs vide loan application dated 06.02.2009, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the KCC of Rs.48.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 09.03.2009, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 81K-01M situated at Village Dhaliwal Bet, Sub Tehsil Dhilwan, District Kapurthala, Punjab and Land measuring 57K-05M situated at Village Mand Dhaliwal Bet, Sub Tehsil Dhilwan, District Kapurthala, Punjab vide mortgaged deed bearing vasika no. 985 dated 04.03.2009, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Fard Jamanandi for the year 202021, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed: Demand Promissory Note, Bearer Letter, Declaration Agreement for multipurpose, Letter of Declaration, Undertaking and Authority, Hypothecation cum Loan Agreement, Deed of Guarantee, Agreement of hypothecation of standing crops, MCLR Agreement, all dated 09.03.2009, which are Annexures A4 to A12 to this OA; Acknowledgment of debts/securities dated 02.12.2011, 28.02.2014, 05.08.2016, 28.06.2019, 16.06.2022, which are Annexures A15 to A19 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 08.04.2025, along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A20 to A22 to this OA; Statement of account with certificate, which are Annexures A23 and A24 to this OA.

¶23

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account there was a debit of Rs.81,92,946.72, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

3 OA/1212/2025

¶25

BANK OF INDIA VS. RAJINDER SINGH DHALIWAL AND ANOTHER

¶26

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.01.2026.

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mohit Garg, Chief Manager cum Constituted Attorney, Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. No one appeared on behalf of defendants for arguments.

¶28

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶29

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to Annexure A24 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no. 1 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. Both had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, loan account was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.81,92,946.72 (Rupees Eighty One Lacs Ninety Two Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six and Paise Seventy Two Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶30

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50%p.a. with 2% penal interest and half yearly rests from 16.05.2025 till the realization. The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester

¶31

4 OA/1212/2025

¶32

BANK OF INDIA VS. RAJINDER SINGH DHALIWAL AND ANOTHER

¶33

years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶34

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.81,92,946.72 (Rupees Eighty One Lacs Ninety Two Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six and Paise Seventy Two Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of mortgaged property/hypothecated assets of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶35

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 14.05.2026.

¶38

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶39

Dated: 23.04.2026.

¶40

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶41

Presiding Officer,

¶42

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of India v. Sh. Rajinder Singh Dhaliwal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Rajinder Singh Dhaliwal and Another

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Ashok Panjla Tiles and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sandeep Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Maninder Singh Banaphal

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Davinder Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Ajmer Singh and Another