Allowed

Idbi Bank Limited v. Sh. Mehanga Singh and Another

DRT28 Aug 2026OA/1299/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by IDBI Bank Limited against Mehanga Singh and another for recovery of Rs. 29,45,564.00. The defendants were declared jointly and severally liable to pay the principal amount with interest at 8% p.a. The application was heard ex-parte as defendants failed to appear or file a written statement.

What did the court decide?

Declaring respondents liable to pay Rs. 29,45,564.00 jointly and severally with costs and simple interest at 8.00% p.a. allowing recovery from sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Idbi Bank Limited versus Sh. Mehanga Singh and Another — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1299/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 15.11.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 28.08.2026

¶6

IDBI Bank Limited i.e. a Company incorporated under the provisions of Company Act, 1956 and a Banking Company within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and having its Head Office at IDBI Tower, WTC Complex Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005 and its Branches at various places including Office at IDBI Bank Limited, Mukandpur Road, Banga, District SBS Nagar, Punjab through its Branch Manager (AGM) duly constituted Attorney, Sh. Jaswinder Singh

¶7

… …..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Mehanga Singh, S/o Sh. Sucha Singh, R/o VPO Kangraur, Distt Nawanshahr, Tehsil Banga, Distt S.B.S. Nagar, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Jagtar Singh, S/o Sh. Mehanga Singh, R/o VPO Kangraur, Distt Nawanshahr, Tehsil Banga, Distt S.B.S. Nagar, Punjab

¶11

…Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Sukhwinder Singh, Advocate for applicant

¶14

None for defendant no. 1 (already ex-parte vide order dated 18.08.2026)

¶15

None for defendant no. 2

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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. 29,45,564.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Forty Five Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jaswinder Singh, Branch Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Delegation of Powers, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶18

2 OA/1299/2023 IDBI BANK LIMITED VS. MEHANGA SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 25.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 01.12.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs. 25.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 10.12.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. 4. Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 25K 07M 06S situated at Village Kangraur, Tehsil Banga, Hadbast no. 32, District S.B.S. Nagar, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4 (1) of the Punjab Agriculture Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act dated 10.12.2014, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Documents executed: DP Note, Hypothecation Agreement and Letter of Guarantee Deed, all dated 12.12.2014, which are Annexure A4, A5 and A7 to this OA; Recall Notices dated 06.05.2023 and 08.06.2023 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and Acknowledgment of Debt cum Revival Letter dated 16.11.2020, which are Annexure A10 and A11 to this OA.

¶20

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. 29,45,564.00 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.

¶21

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal and after service upon defendants, Sh. Anup Prajapati, Advocate proxy for Sh. Arpan Sabharwal, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendant no. 2 on 07.05.2025 and filed POA. Paper book was supplied to him on 20.04.2026 but no WS was filed. Therefore, opportunity to file WS by defendant no. 2 was closed and defence was struck off vide order dated 18.08.2026. None appeared on behalf of defendant no. 1. Therefore, defendant no. 1 was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 18.08.2026.

¶22

3 OA/1299/2023 IDBI BANK LIMITED VS. MEHANGA SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jaswinder Singh, Branch Manager, IDBI Bank Limited, h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record.

¶24

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.

¶25

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A11 to this OA, it is proved that defendant no. 1 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility, which was granted to him. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. Defendants 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, the 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. 29,45,564.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Forty Five Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Four 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.00%p.a. plus @2% penal interest with monthly/half yearly rests from the date of institution of OA till the realization.

¶26

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/mortgaged property, 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 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.

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶28

¶29

OA/1299/2023

¶30

IDBI BANK LIMITED VS. MEHANGA SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶31

Rs.29,45,564.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Forty Five Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Four 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 property of defendant no. 1 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.

¶32

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 10.09.2026. 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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 28.08.2026

¶36

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶37

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Idbi Bank Limited v. Sh. Mehanga Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Limited v. Sh. Mehanga 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. Anuj Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Bikram Singh through His Legal Heirs and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Simranjot Singh

Canara Bank versus M/S M. K. Industries and Another

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Shabeg Singh and Another

Central Bank of India versus M/S Guru Kirpa Knitwear Fashion and Another