Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh.JAsvir Singh

DRT29 Apr 2026OA/1252/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte recovery application, the Tribunal found the defendant liable to repay a term loan of Rs. 23.51 Lacs. It allowed the application and granted simple interest at 8% p.a. while permitting recovery through hypothecated or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 23,51,623.90 with simple interest at 08% p.a. from date of application; order to issue Recovery Certificate and arrange sale of assets.

Union Bank of India versus Sh.JAsvir Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1252/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 10.09.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.04.2026

¶6

Union Bank of India, a Body Corporate, constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act no. V of 1970 and having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Branch amongst other places at Bhadson, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab through its General Power of Attorney cum Branch Manager, Sh. Manpreet Singh

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Jasvir Singh, S/o Sh. Surjit Singh, R/o Village Ram Singh Nau Bhadson, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab- 147202

¶10

……….Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Abhineet Taneja, Advocate for applicant (through VC) None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 17.03.2026)

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 23,51,623.90 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty One Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three and Paise Ninety Only). The Original Application has been filed Sh. Manpreet Singh, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 09.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan for purchase of Combine

¶16

2 OA NO.1252/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. JASVIR SINGH

¶17

Harvester of Rs. 22.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 18.12.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs. 22.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 18.12.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶19

Defendant hypothecated his moveable asset namely Harvester Gurdial 651 bearing Registration no. PB11DF2149, Engine no. E613CDPC429949E and Chassis no. NGAI651L230291 vide RC, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement, Agreement of Hypothecation of Vehicle, General Term Loan Agreement and DP Note along with Letter of Continuity, all dated 18.12.2023, which are Annexure A4 to A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 01.02.2025, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A10 to this OA.

¶21

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs. 23,51,623.90, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 17.03.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Manpreet Singh, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel (through VC) 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 Annexures A1 to A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which were granted to him and for that he had executed

¶22

3 OA NO.1252/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. JASVIR SINGH

¶23

all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,51,623.90 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty One Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three and Paise Ninety Only), along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00%p.a. with half yearly rests w.e.f. 01.07.2025 till realization.

¶25

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 hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester 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.

¶26

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.23,51,623.90 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Fifty One Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three and Paise Ninety Only), 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 assets of the defendant 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

¶27

4 OA NO.1252/2025 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. JASVIR SINGH

¶28

recov	er the same by attachment and sale	of personal assets of the
defe proce 12.	ndant. The applicant is at liberty to enf ss of law. Any other application pending sta	orce the claim through due nds disposed of.
13.	Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly	.
14.	Parties to appear before Learned	Recovery Officer of this
Tribu	nal on 20.05.2026.
15.	Copy of this order be given Dasti to th	e applicant and be sent to
defe	ndant through registered/speed post	and this order be also
uploa consi Pron	ded on the official website of this gned. ounced by me in the open Tribunal.	Tribunal and record be
Date	d: 29.04.2026
	(MRI	DULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Sh.JAsvir Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh.JAsvir 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

Canara Bank versus Sh. Ashwani Jindal and Others

Union Bank of India versus Ms Shree Shyam Enterprises and Another

State Bank of India versus Smt. Sarita Vohra and Others

Canara Bank versus Sh. Satbir Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pargat Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Lakhvir Singh