Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh. Jeet Singh and Another

DRT23 Jan 2026OA/1290/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-III, Chandigarh allowed the bank's recovery application against borrowers and a guarantor for an NPA loan. The tribunal directed payment of the principal sum, costs, and redoated future interest to 8% p.a., permitting recovery via auction or attachment of assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 39,37,465.60 plus simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date, enforceable via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Canara Bank versus Sh. Jeet Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1290/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.11.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.01.2026

¶6

Canara Bank, a body corporate and Nationalized Bank under the provisions of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970 with its Head Office at J C Road, Bangalore and amongst other a Branch Office at Mall Road (Main) Branch Kapurthala, District Kapurthala through its Constituted Attorney and Branch Manager Sh. Charanjit Ram son of Late Sh. Gurdial Ram.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Jeet Singh S/o Sh. Banta Singh, village Noorpur Khiranwali,

¶10

P.O. khiranwali, District Kapurthala, Punjab.

¶11

Sh. Bakshish Singh S/o Sh. Didar Singh, Resident of H.No.451,

¶12

Model Town, Kapurthala, District Kapurthala, Punjab.

¶13

….……Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. K.H.S. Bath, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pushpinder Singh Handa, Advocate for Applicant

¶16

None for defendant no.1

¶17

Defendant no.2 already ex parte order dated 10.11.2025

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.39,37,465.60 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Five and Paise Sixty Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Charanjit Ram, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of attorney dated 20.09.2006, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶20

¶21

OA NO.1290/2023 CANARA BANK VS. JEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 12.08.2009, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 approached the applicant enhancement for KCC Limit of Rs.25.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 12.10.2012, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Letter of renewal dated 25.10.2012, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Letter of renewal dated 16.02.2017, which is Annexure A16 to this OA.

¶23

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 12.08.2009, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the KCC Limit was enhanced by the applicant to Rs.25.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 25.10.2012, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and thereafter renewed the same vide application cum sanction for renewal dated 16.02.2017, which is Annexure A15 to this OA.

¶24

Defendant no.1 mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. land measuring 48K-00Marla situated at Village Noorpur Khiranwali, Tehsil and District Kapurthala, Punjab vide simple mortgaged deed bearing vasika no. 852 dated 28.05.2009 and vasika no. 3365 dated 23.10.2012, along with their translation, which are Annexures A6 & A14 to this OA.

¶25

Documents executed: Collector rates, along with its translation, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 12.08.2009, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Link letter dated 12.08.2009, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Supplemental agreement, link letter, guarantee agreement, all dated 25.10.2012, which are Annexures A10, A11, A13 to this OA; Acknowledgement of debt dated 03.08.2012, 22.06.2015, 04.12.2017,

¶26

¶27

OA NO.1290/2023 CANARA BANK VS. JEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶28

20.04.2020 & 04.12.2022, which are Annexures A17 to A21 to this OA; Legal notice dated 17.05.2023, which is Annexure A22 to this OA and Statement of account along with certificate, which is Annexure A23 to this OA.

¶29

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.39,37,465.60, 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.

¶30

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal. Sh. Chander Shekhar Sharma, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendant no. 1 on 06.04.2024 and filed his Power of Attorney on behalf of defendant no. 1. Since, WS was not filed by defendant no.1, his opportunity to file the same was closed and his defense was struck off vide order dated 12.11.2024. Since no one appeared in the matter on behalf of defendant no. 2, he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 10.11.2025.

¶31

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Charanjit Ram, Senior Manager, Canara Bank, has been filed.

¶32

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶33

No one appeared on behalf of defendant no.1 for arguments. It was argued by learned proxy 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 Annexures A1 to A23 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank.

¶34

The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions

¶35

of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the

¶36

¶37

OA NO.1290/2023 CANARA BANK VS. JEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶38

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.39,37,465.60 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Five and Paise Sixty Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶39

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.95%p.a. plus 2% penal interest with half yearly rests from 14.10.2023 till the realization.

¶40

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 years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%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.

¶41

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.39,37,465.60 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Five and Paise Sixty Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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 properties/hypothecated assets of defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under

¶42

¶43

OA NO.1290/2023 CANARA BANK VS. JEET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶44

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.

¶45

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of .

¶46

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶47

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 05.02.2026.

¶48

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.

¶49

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶50

Dated: 23.01.2026.

¶51

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Sh. Jeet Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh. Jeet Singh 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kulwinder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Alliance Paints and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Hira Singh

Axis Bank versus Sh. Harjinder Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Rakesh Kumar Alias Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal and Another