Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Sukhbir Kaur and Others

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/1243/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of agricultural credit. The defendants failed to repay the loan, leading to classification as NPA. After hearing ex parte, the Tribunal directed recovery of principal plus simple interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.27,50,046.36 with simple interest @08.00% p.a. from OA filing date. Recovery through sale of mortgaged properties or attachment of assets.

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Sukhbir Kaur and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1243/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 31.08.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 27.03.2026

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act No.V of 1970, carrying on Banking Business and having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 in the State of Maharashtra and its Branch Office inter-alia at Union Bank of India, Tarn Taran Branch, Pandit Hanuman Market, Krishna Plaza, near Darshani Gate, Amritsar Road, Tarn Taran, Punjab, through its Branch Manager cum duly constituted Attorney, Sh. Didar Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Sukhbir Kaur, W/o Sh. Manjinder Singh, R/o Village Naurangabad, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran, Punjab-143401

¶10

Sh. Manjinder Singh, S/o Sh. Bakhshish Singh, R/o Village Naurangabad, Tehsil and Distrcit Tarn Taran, Punjab-143401

¶11

Sh. Baljinder Singh, S/o Sh. Sardool Singh, R/o Village Naurangabad, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran, Punjab- 143401

¶12

Sh. Dilbag Singh, S/o Sh. Jarnail Singh, R/o Village Naurangabad, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran, Punjab- 143401

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Ms. Karuna Kumari Dogra, Advocate for applicant Defendants already ex parte vide order dated 12.03.2026

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.27,50,046.36 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Fifty Thousand Forty Six and Paise Thirty Six only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Didar Singh, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application as per Power of Attorney dated 04.08.2014, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶18

2 OA NO.1243/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. SUKHBIR KAUR AND OTHERS

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 applied for grant of Agricultural Credit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 14.03.2016, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for renewal of Agricultural Credit of Rs. 20.00 Lacs.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the Loan of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 03.05.2026, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. The applicant sanctioned the renewed facility of Rs. 20.00 Lacs vide Loan Application and Sanction Letter dated 28.04.2022, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Terms and conditions were duly accepted by defendants. Defendant nos. 3 and 4 stood as guarantors.

¶21

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged her immovable property i.e. Land measuring 44K 04M situated at Village Naurangabad, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4 (1) of the Punjab Agriculture Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978 dated 04.05.2016, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Letter for Creation of Charge of Bank dated 04.05.2016, which is Annexure A16 to this OA; Fard Jamabandi for the year 2012-2013 along with translation, which is Annexure A17 to this OA and Mortgage Deed, which is Annexure A18 to this OA. Documents executed :- DP Note, Letter of Continuity, Hypothecation Agreement for Agriculture Advance, Declaration/Undertaking for Agriculture Advance, Simple Loan Agreement, Letter of Confirmation, Deed of Guarantee, Agreement of Rate of Interest, Letter of Undertaking by Borrower and Letter of Undertaking by Guarantor, all dated 28.04.2022, which are Annexure A5 to A14 to this OA; Legal Opinion dated 25.03.2016, which is Annexure A19 to this OA; Collector Rate, which is Annexure A20 to this OA; Debt Balance Confirmation, which is Annexure A21 to this OA; Recall/Legal Notice dated 17.04.2025, which is Annexure A22 to this OA and Account Statement with certificate, which is Annexure A23 and A24 to this OA.

¶22

5.The account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.27,50,046.36 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Fifty Thousand Forty Six

¶23

3 OA NO.1243/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. SUKHBIR KAUR AND OTHERS

¶24

and Paise Thirty Six only)which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶25

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal, but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 12.03.2026.

¶26

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Didar Singh, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India h as been filed.

¶27

Heard ex parte arguments and perused record.

¶28

It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A24 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached applicant for availing of the Agricultural Credit loan facility which was granted to them and for that they 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, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.27,50,046.36 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Fifty Thousand Forty Six and Paise Thirty Six 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.

¶29

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.90%p.a. (including penal interest@2% p.a.) with yearly rests from 01.07.2025 till the realization.

¶30

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 NO.1243/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. SUKHBIR KAUR AND OTHERS

¶32

years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform 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.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.27,50,046.36 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Fifty Thousand Forty Six and Paise Thirty Six 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 hypothecated asstes/mortgaged property 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.

¶34

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 17.04.2026. 15. 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 . Dated: 27.03.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶35

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Sukhbir Kaur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Sukhbir Kaur and Others

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 Sh. Narinder Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Babu Lal and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Jasvir Singh since deceased through his Lrs

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Banarasi Lal and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Mohinder Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Yadwinder Singh and Others