Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Subash Chander

DRT6 May 2026OA/1693/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte order under the RDB Act, the Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's application for recovery of Rs. 30.98 Lacks plus interest. The petition was unopposed as the defendant did not appear. The order fixed uniform interest at 8% p.a. and authorized recovery via SARFAESI or asset attachment.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 30,98,166.44 plus costs and 8% p.a. simple interest until realization.

Bank of India versus Sh. Subash Chander — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1693/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.12.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.05.2026

¶6

Bank of India, Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (5 of 1970) having its Head Office at Star House, Plot no. C-5, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400051 and among other Branches and one such Branch at Dera Bassi, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab through its duly constituted Attorney, Sh. Ajay Singh

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Subash Chander, S/o Sh. Khem Chand, R/o House no. H-509, Phase 1, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab- 160055

¶9

………. Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Samjot Singh Thind, Advocate for applicant (through VC)

¶12

None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 28.01.2026)

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 30,98,166.44 (Rupees Thirty Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Forty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Ajay Singh, Constituted Attorney o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 20.01.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 4.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 31.05.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant approached the applicant for grant of OD limit of Rs. 10.00

¶16

2 OA/1693/2025 BANK OF INDIA VS. SUBHASH CHANDER

¶17

Lacs vide Loan Application dated 09.09.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 4.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 05.06.2014, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the OD Limit of Rs. 10.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 15.09.2014, which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶19

Defendant mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 08 Bigha situated at Village Sonamajra, Hadbast no. 367, Tehsil Ghanour, District Patiala, Punjab vide Registered Mortage bearing vasika no. 415 dated 04.06.2014, Legal Mortgage dated 15.09.2014 and Jamabandi for the year 2018-2019, which are Annexure A17 to A19 to this OA. Documents Executed: DP Note, Bearer Letter, Declaration obtained from Borrower, Agreement for Multipurpose, Letter of Declaration, Undertaking and Authority and Hypothecation cum Loan Agreement, all dated 05.06.2014, which are Annexure A6 to A11 to this OA; DP Note, Bearer Letter, Declaration obtained from Borrower, Agreement for Multipurpose, Letter of Declaration, Undertaking, all dated 17.09.2014, which are Annexure A12 to A16 to this OA; Acknowledgments of Debt/Securities dated 05.06.2017, 02.06.2020, 24.11.2020, 05.06.2017, 02.06.2020 and 24.11.2022, which are Annexure A20 to A25 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.11.2025 along with postal receipts, which are Annexure A26 and A27 to this OA; Account Statements with certificate and uncharged interest, which are Annexure A28 to A30 to this OA.

¶20

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 30,98,166.44 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.

¶21

3 OA/1693/2025 BANK OF INDIA VS. SUBHASH CHANDER

¶22

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of the defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 28.01.2026. 8. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Ajay Singh, Constituted Attorney, Bank of India h as been filed. 9. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 10. It was argued by learned counsel for applicant (through VC) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶23

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A30 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendant were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.30,98,166.44 (Rupees Thirty Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Forty Four 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 pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in clause 5 para C (iv.) has claimed interest @13.70%p.a. in KCC Limit Account and @13.20% p.a. in OD Limit Account plus @2% penal interest w.e.f. 12.11.2025 till the realization. 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 defendant, quantum of loans 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 both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the

¶25

4 OA/1693/2025 BANK OF INDIA VS. SUBHASH CHANDER

¶26

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 defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.30,98,166.44 (Rupees Thirty Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred Sixty Six and Paise Forty Four Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in both the loan accounts 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/hypothecated assets of 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 recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶28

13. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 28.05.2026.

¶31

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶32

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 06.05.2026

¶33

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶34

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of India v. Sh. Subash Chander

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Subash Chander

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

Axis Bank Limited versus Sh. Harpreet Singh Mankoo

State Bank of India versus Sh. Maninder Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Deeksha Roadlines and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Chhinder Singh Alias Sinder Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Sat Kartar Transport Company and Others

State Bank of India versus Smt. Harmanraj Kaur