Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh Mukhtiar Singh

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/1906/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of ₹27,37,994.31 plus interest advanced as a loan. The court permitted recovery from the mortgaged land and personal properties of the defaulting defendants.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹27,37,994.31 with interest @11.60% p.a. allowed; recovery certificate issued; sale of mortgaged land and personal properties directed.

Union Bank of India versus Sh Mukhtiar Singh — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1906/2022

¶4

Date of Institution: 08.09.2022 Date of Decision: 27.04.2026

¶5

Union Bank of India having its branches all over India and a branch at Jalalabad, Near Old Sabji Mandi, PNB Road, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Sh. Mukhtiar Singh s/o Sh. Amar Singh, r/o Village Chak Janisar, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶9

Sh. Gurtej Singh s/o Sh. Mukhtiar Singh, r/o Village Chak Janisar, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Gurbhej Singh s/o Sh. Mukhtiar Singh, r/o Village Chak Janisar, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶11

Sh. Jaswinder Singh, r/o VPO Chak Janisar, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶12

Sh. Suresh Kumar s/o Sh. Karnail Chand, R/o r/o VPO Lamochar Kalan, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶13

……….Defendants

¶14

Advocates

¶15

Sh. MN Sharma through VC, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 28.02.2024 .

¶16

OA for the Recovery of ₹27,37,994.31p with interest @11.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 08.09.2022.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Union Bank of India has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹27,37,994.31p with interest against Sh. and others (defendants).

¶19

Bank’s case is that on 20.08.2014, it had granted a loan of

¶20

₹20.00Lacs to defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in the form of K.C.C Limit for

¶21

¶22

agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant Nos.4 and 5 stood as guarantors vide guarantee agreement dated 20.08.2014. The aforementioned limit was renewed on 19.01.2019. The loan was chargeable to interest @11.60% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 01.12.2015, 25.10.2017 and 18.12.2019. On 31.08.2022, a sum of ₹27,37,994.31p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶23

On 27.09.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 28.02.2024, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶24

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Naveen Kumar, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-31. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of ₹20.00 Lacs and on 31.08.2022, a sum of ₹27,37,994.31p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹27,37,994.31p (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Thirty One Only) with interest @11.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 08.09.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶25

¶26

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 29.05.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 27.04.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Union Bank of India v. Sh Mukhtiar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh Mukhtiar 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

Union Bank of India versus S S T Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bank of India versus Ms Box Well Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chandrashekhar Pundlik Jagtap

Bank of Baroda versus Anushka Jain Proprietor Ms Ur Choice

Canara Bank versus Mr R Markondaiah

State Bank of India versus Kavitha. N