Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Satnam Singh

DRT6 Mar 2026OA/240/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DT tribunal allowed an application by HDFC Bank for recovery of ₹59.42 lakh principal and interest against the borrowers and guarantor. The liability of deceased borrowers' heirs is limited to inherited assets, while guarantors are jointly liable. A recovery certificate and order for sale of mortgaged land were issued.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹59,42,867 with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Directions to sell mortgaged land and distribute proceeds.

Hdfc Bank versus Satnam Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 240/2023 Date of Institution: 09.01.2023 Date of Decision: 06.03.2026

¶4

HDFC Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Krishangarh Branch, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Satnam Singh s/o Sh. Bir Singh @Vir Singh, since deceased through his legal heirs/legal representatives detailed as under:

¶8

(a) Davinder Singh s/o Sh. Satnam Singh, r/o H.No.103, Village Sarmastpur, Jalandhar, Punjab, Part-2, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶9

(b) Manjit Kaur w/o Sh. Satnam Singh, r/o H.No.103, Village Sarmastpur, Jalandhar, Punjab, Part-2, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶10

Davinder Singh s/o Sh. Satnam Singh, r/o H.No. 103, Village Sarmastpur, Jalandhar, Punjab, Part-2, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶11

Manjit Kaur w/o Sh. Satnam Singh, r/o H.No. 103, Village Sarmastpur, Jalandhar, Punjab, Part-2, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶12

Jasvir Singh s/o Sh. Mehanga Singh, r/o Village Sarmastpur, Jalandhar, Punjab, Part-2, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶13

……….Defendants

¶14

Advocates

¶15

Sh. Anup Prajapati proxy counsel for Sh. Saurabh Bhardwaj, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶16

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 14.08.2025 .

¶17

OA for the Recovery of ₹59,42,867/- with interest @10.50% per annum with half-yearly rests from 09.01.2023.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

HDFC Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹59,42,867/- with interest against Sh. Satnam Singh and others (defendants).

¶20

¶21

Bank’s case is that on 31.12.2015, it had granted a loan of ₹45.00 Lacs to defendant Nos.1 to 3 in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. Defendant no.1 is deceased and now being represented through his legal heirs i.e. defendant Nos. 1(i), (ii). To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 (now deceased) had mortgaged his agricultural land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.4 stood as guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @10.50% per annum with halfyearly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 31.12.2018. On 20.11.2022, a sum of ₹59,42,867/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶22

On 15.02.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 14.08.2025, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Harminder Pal Singh, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11. 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 ₹45.00 Lacs and on 20.11.2022, a sum of ₹59,42,867/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹59,42,867/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lacs Forty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Seven Only) with interest @10.50% per annum with halfyearly rests from 09.01.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of the legal heirs of Sh. Satnam Singh would be limited upto the extent of the property inherited by them from Sh. Satnam Singh (now deceased), whereas the liability of defendant Nos.2

¶23

¶24

to 4 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 defendant Nos.2 to 4.

¶25

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶26

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶27

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 14.04.2026, 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 .

¶28

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶29

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 06.03.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Hdfc Bank v. Satnam Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Satnam 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Joginder Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Pritpal Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Abhay Pundeer

Canara Bank versus Sri. Maruthi Sidram Aski

Hdfc Bank versus Dinesh Kumar

Bank of India versus Sh Atma Singh