Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Parwinder Singh and Others

DRT15 Apr 2026OA/241/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-III, Chandigarh allowed an ex-parte Original Application filed by HDFC Bank for recovery of Rs.32,05,483.36. The court awarded simple interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 11.25% and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate under SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.32,05,483.36 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of filing; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Parwinder Singh and Others — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.241/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.02.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 15.04.2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act 1949, and having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai- 400013 and its Regional Office at Bank House, Plot No.1-15, Sector 101, Alpha, IT City, Mohali, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab-160062 and having one of its Branch Offices, at Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur (Punjab), through its Authorized Signatory Mrs. Pooja Arora.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Parwinder Singh S/o Sh. Randhir Singh, R/o VPO Sakrodi, Near Baba Rikhi Ram Kutia, Tehsil and District Sangrur- 148026

¶10

Sh. Randhir Singh S/o Sh. Teja Singh, R/o VPO Sakrodi, Near Baba Rikhi Ram Kutia, Tehsil and District Sangrur- 148026

¶11

Sh. Jagdev Singh S/o Sh. Ninder Singh, R/o VPO Sakrodi, Tehsil and District Sangrur- 148026

¶12

.……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Abhinav Singla, Advocate proxy for Sh. Ankur Jindal, Advocate for applicant

¶15

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 16.02.2026)

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.32,05,483.36 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Five Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Three and Paise Thirty Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Mrs. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original

¶18

2 OA NO.241/2025 HDFC BANK VS. PARWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶19

Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 16.01.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 & 2 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.24.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.6.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 11.05.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no 3 stood as Guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.24.00 Lacs, Term Loan of Rs.6.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 21.05.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

The Term Loan of Rs. 6.00 Lacs has been cleared by the defendants. 4. Defendant no. 2 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 22Bighas-0Biswas detailed as under: (i) Land measuring 17Bighas-6Biswas Kham situated Village Sakrodi, Tehsil and District Sangrur, Punjab (ii) Land measuring 4Bighas-14Biswas Kham situated Village Dittupura, Tehsil and District Sangrur, Punjab vide Mortgaged Deed bearing Vasika no. 394 dated 22.05.2013, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Confirmation letter by Advocate regarding mutation dated 27.05.2013, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Documents executed: Agreements for Cash Credit Facility dated 27.05.2013, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Statement of Account with certificate, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 06.12.2024, with Postal Receipts which are Annexures A9 to A12 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account there was a debit of Rs.32,05,483.36, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶22

3 OA NO.241/2025 HDFC BANK VS. PARWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶23

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 16.02.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Pooja Arora, Senior Manager, HDFC Bank Limited, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A12 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility, which was granted to them and for that they 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, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.32,05,483.36 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Five Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Three and Paise Thirty Six Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶25

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.25% p.a. with from 06.12.2024 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, 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

4 OA NO.241/2025 HDFC BANK VS. PARWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.32,05,483.36 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Five Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Three and Paise Thirty Six 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 hypothecated assets/mortgaged property of defendants 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. 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 05.05.2026 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: 15.04.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Parwinder Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Parwinder 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

Bank of India versus Sh. Bakhshish Singh And Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Smt. Saranjit Kaur and Others

Bank of India versus Sh. Surinder Singh and Another

Bank of India versus M/s Estofers Enterprises LLP and Others

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Nirbhay Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S R S Engg Works and Another