Allowed

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) v. Mr Naresh Kumar

DRT9 Apr 2026OA/1252/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of outstanding dues of Rs.23,53,068.41 plus interest against defendants who failed to appear after summons service. The court permitted recovery via sale of mortgaged property and directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs.23,53,068.41 with interest; issued recovery certificate; directed sale of mortgaged land and distribution of proceeds.

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Mr… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1252/2022 Date of Institution: 17.06.2022 Date of Decision: 09.04.2026

¶4

Punjab National Bank (erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce) having its branches all over India and a branch at Mahilpur, Phagwara Road, Distt. Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

¶7

Mr. Naresh Kumar s/o Sh. Chhajju Ram, r/o Ward No.4, SAS Nagar, Tehsil Garshankar, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶8

Mrs. Adarsh Kumari w/o Sh. Naresh Kumar, r/o Ward No.4, SAS Nagar, Tehsil Garshankar, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶9

Mr. Krishan Saroop Jakhu s/o Sh. Pritam Dass, r/o H.No.B/2/32/1, Civil Lines, Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶10

Mr. Sukhdev Singh s/o Sh. Prem Lal, r/o VPO Baddo, Distt. Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶11

……….Defendants

¶12

Advocates

¶13

Ms. Ritika Kansal proxy counsel for Sh. M.N. Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶14

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 20.09.2023 .

¶15

OA for the Recovery of Rs.23,53,068.41p with interest @11.50% per annum with monthly rests from 17.06.2022.

¶16

ORDER

¶17

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.23,53,068.41p with interest against Mr. Naresh Kumar and others (defendants).

¶18

Bank’s case is that on 18.04.2006, it had granted Term Loan-I of Rs.7.00 Lacs to defendant Nos.1 and 2 for Housing purpose. To secure the Term Loan-I, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his property (fully

¶19

¶20

detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.3 stood as guarantor vide guarantee agreement dated 06.05.2006. On 11.09.2009, at the request of the defendants, bank granted another Term Loan-II of Rs.12.00Lacs to defendant Nos.1 and 2 for housing purpose. To secure the Term Loan-II, Defendant Nos.1 and 2 had mortgaged their property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Again on 17.08.2017, bank granted a Term Loan of Rs.7.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 for personal use. Defendant Nos. 2 and 4 stood as guarantors for the Term Loan of Rs.7.00 Lacs vide guarantee agreement dated 25.08.2017. All the loan facilities were chargeable at different rates of interest. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 13.05.2008, 08.04.2011, 04.09.2012, 02.04.2014, 30.08.2014, 19.07.2016, 28.03.2017, 21.05.2019, 27.02.2020, 21.08.2020 and 18.04.2022. On 31.05.2022, a sum of Rs.23,53,068.41p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application. 3. On 12.07.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 20.09.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶21

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Dev Raj, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-47. 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 loans under various schemes and on 31.05.2022, a sum of Rs.23,53,068.41p (Rs.5,92,080/- in Term Loan-I; Rs.4,14,117.58p in Term Loan-Personal Use; Rs.13,46,870.83p in Term Loan-II) was due.

¶22

¶23

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.23,53,068.41p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty Three Thousand Sixty Eight and Paise Forty One Only) with interest @11.50% per annum with monthly rests from 17.06.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of defendant nos. 1 to 3 would be joint and several for the amount due in Term Loan-I, the liability of Defendant nos. 1 and 2 would be joint and several for the amount due in Term Loan-II and the liability of Defendant nos. 1, 2 and 4 would be joint and several for the amount due in Term Loan-Personal Use. 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.

¶24

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 12.05.2026, 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 parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 09.04.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) v. Mr Naresh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) v. Mr Naresh Kumar

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 versus Swati Enterprises

Ms Maihar Enterprises versus Hdfc Bank

Canara Bank versus Kashmir Singh

Brij Mohan Sharma versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Ms Aryan Nandani Embroidery and Another versus Sammaan Capital Limited

Central Bank of India versus M/S Vijaylakshmi Egg Foods