Allowed

Indian Bank v. Sh. Jaswant Singh and Others

DRT15 Jul 2026OA/1897/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Indian Bank to recover Rs. 89,26,335.00 from borrowers and a guarantor. The court granted a recovery certificate and directed the recovery of principal and simple interest at 8% p.a. via hypothecated or personal assets under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants liable to pay Rs. 89,26,335.00 with simple interest at 8% p.a.; Applicant may recover via sale of mortgaged/hypothecated assets under SARFAESI Act.

Indian Bank versus Sh. Jaswant Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1897/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.11.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 15.07.2026

¶6

Indian Bank (erstwhile Allahabad Bank) on the basis of Amalgamation Scheme dated 04.03.2022, a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai and Corporate Office at 254-260, Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Chennai, Tamil Nadu600014 and having its Zonal Office at Ludhiana, Punjab and amongst other Branches, a Branch at Khanna, Punjab through its Chief Manager, Sh. Amarjeet Singh, duly Constituted and Authorized Signatory

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Jaswant Singh, S/o Sh. Harchand Singh, R/o Village Bhorla, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Rajbir Singh, S/o Sh. Jaswant Singh, R/o Village Bhorla, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab

¶11

Sh. Gurinder Singh, S/o Sh. Kulwant Singh, R /o Village Bhorla, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab

¶12

…..Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Ms. Deepika Mittal, Advocate for applicant

¶15

Sh. Sukhjeet Singh, Advocate for defendants

¶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. 89,26,335.00 (Rupees Eighty Nine Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Amarjeet Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original

¶18

2 OA NO. 1897/2022 INDIAN BANK VS. JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS

¶19

Application vide Power of Attorney dated 13.10.2014, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant of CC Limit of Rs. 5.00 Lacs and Term Loan- I of Rs. 6.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 18.12.2007, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for enhancement of CC Limit to Rs. 12.00 Lacs and grant of Term Loan- II of Rs. 21.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 27.04.2010, which is Annexure A10 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for enhancement of CC Limit to Rs. 15.00 Lacs and grant of Term LoanIII of Rs. 17.00 Lacs vide Application dated 15.05.2011. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan- IV of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 08.05.2013, which is Annexure A22 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan- V of Rs. 2.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 02.06.2014, which is Annexure A30 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan- VI of Rs. 67.00 Lacs and enhancement of CC Limit to Rs. 20.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 12.08.2015, which is Annexure A34 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for reduction of CC Limit to Rs. 17.00 Lacs and renewal of Term Loan- III, IV, V and VI vide Application dated 27.03.2018.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs. 5.00 Lacs and Term Loan- I of Rs. 6.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 27.12.2007, which is Annexure A5 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned enhancement of CC Limit to Rs. 12.00 Lacs and Term Loan- II of Rs.21.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 27.04.2010, which is Annexure A13 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned enhancement of CC Limit to Rs. 15.00 Lacs and Term Loan- III of Rs.17.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 28.06.2011, which is Annexure A17 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Term

¶22

3 OA NO. 1897/2022 INDIAN BANK VS. JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS

¶23

Loan- IV of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 16.05.2013, which is Annexure A25 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Term Loan- V of Rs. 2.00 Lacs. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Term Loan- VI of Rs. 67.00 Lacs and enhancement of CC Limit to Rs. 20.00 Lacs. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned reduction of CC Limit to Rs. 17.00 Lacs and renewal of Term Loans- III, IV, V and VI vide Renewal cum Sanction Letter dated 27.03.2018, which is Annexure A40 to this OA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor in all the loan accounts.

¶24

	As per the OA, Term Loans- I and II of Rs. 6.00 Lacs and
Rs.21	.00 Lacs were paid by the defendants.
4.	Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable properties which are:
i.	Land measuring 16K 00M situated at Village Bhorla, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 2288 dated 12.12.2007 along with its translation, which isAnnexure A9to this OA;
ii.	Land measuring 31K 03M situated at Village Bhorla, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab
vide	Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 444 and 1172 dated
17.05	.2010 and 28.06.2011 and Declaration u/s 4 (1) of the Punjab
Agricu	ltural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks)
Act, 1 which	978 dated 23.12.2015 and Jamabandi for the year 2011-2012, areAnnexure A16, A21, A38 and A39to this OA. Defendant nos. 1 and 2 hypothecated their all live stocks, tools
and e	quipment vide Hypothecation Agreements dated 27.12.2007,
20.05	.2010, 04.07.2011, 07.06.2013, 19.06.2014 and 04.01.2016,
which	areAnnexure A7, A15, A19, A28, A32 and A37to this OA.
Docu	ments executed:Interview cum Appraisal Form, Memorandum
of Sa	nction Letter, DP Note and Deed of Guarantee, all dated
27.12	.2007, which areAnnexure A3, A4, A6 and A8to this OA;
Interv	iew cum Appraisal Form and Memorandum of Sanction Letter,
27.04	.2010, which areAnnexure A11 and A12to this OA; DP Notes
dated Anne	20.05.2010, 04.07.2011, 19.06.2014 and 12.01.2016, which are xure A14, A18, A31 and A36to this OA; Deeds of Guarantee

¶25

4 OA NO. 1897/2022 INDIAN BANK VS. JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS

¶26

dated 28.06.2011 and 19.06.2014, which are Annexure A20 and A33 to this OA; Interview cum Appraisal Form and Memorandum of Sanction Letter, 16.05.2013, which are Annexure A23 and A24 to this OA; DP Note and Consent Clauses, all dated 07.06.2013, which are Annexure A26, A27 and A29 to this OA; Interview cum Appraisal Form dated 12.08.2015, which is Annexure A35 to this OA; Acknowledgments of Debt dated 23.10.2018 and 03.09.2021, which are Annexure A41 and A42 to this OA and Accounts Statement, which is Annexure A43 to this OA.

¶27

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. 89,26,335.00, 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. 6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal and after service upon defendants, Sh. SH Randhawa, Advocate appeared on behalf of the defendants on 02.03.2023 and filed Memo of Appearance. WS was filed on 25.07.2023. Replication to WS was filed on 21.03.2024. Thereafter, the process of admission or denial of documents was completed on 11.05.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Amarjeet Singh, Chief Manager, Indian Bank has been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant had proved its case and OA is not barred by limitation or any other law. Learned counsel for defendants submitted that lenient view may be taken at the time of decree and prayed for granting of simple rate of interest. He has not advanced any other arguments.

¶28

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A43 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor in all the loan accounts. Defendants had

¶29

5 OA NO. 1897/2022 INDIAN BANK VS. JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS

¶30

executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 89,26,335.00 (Rupees Eighty Nine Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Five 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.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.70%p.a. plus @2% p.a. penal interest with monthly rests from 01.09.2022 till the realization.

¶32

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 properties, undertaking of the defendants, 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 simple interest @8.00% p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.89,26,335.00 (Rupees Eighty Nine Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Five Only) jointly and severally, 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 hypothecated assets of defendant nos. 1 and 2 and mortgaged properties of defendant no. 1 in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the

¶34

6 OA NO. 1897/2022 INDIAN BANK VS. JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS

¶35

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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 30.07.2026. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 15.07.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶36

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Indian Bank v. Sh. Jaswant Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Sh. Jaswant Singh and Others

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Rajinder Pandey and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Manjinder Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Rs Freight Carrier and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Abhishek Enterprises and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Paramjeet Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gursewak Singh