Allowed

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Satnam Singh and Others

DRT4 Jul 2026OA/255/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application under S. 19 RDB Act for recovery of loan dues. The Court verified liability, upheld the claim, and optimized the interest rate to 8% p.a. before issuing the Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Respondents liable to pay principal plus 8% p.a. interest from filing till realization; liberty to enforce sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 255/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 14.02.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 04.07.2026

¶6

IDBI Bank Limited, company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) and a company within the meaning of Section 2(20) of the Companies Act, 2013 and a banking company within the meaning of Section 5(c) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) and having its Registered Office at IDBI Tower, W.T.C. Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 and having a Branch Office, amongst others at Upper Ground Floor, Ludhiana Stock Exchange, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana (Punjab), through Sh. Kamlesh Sharma, BH/DGM and authorized signatory of IDBI Bank Limited.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Satnam Singh son of Sh. Sardara Singh, resident of Village Khosa Kotla, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, (Punjab).

¶10

Sh. Ranjit Singh son of Sh. Bachan Singh, resident of Village Khosa Kotla, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, (Punjab).

¶11

Smt. Nasib Kaur W/o Sh. Sardara Singh, resident of Village Khosa Kotla, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, (Punjab).

¶12

.……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Satinder Pal Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate for applicant (through VC) None for Defendant no. 1

¶15

Defendant nos. 2 & 3 already ex parte vide order dated 13.02.2026

¶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.38,45,194.48 (Rupees Thirty Eight Lac

¶18

¶19

OA/ 255/2022 IDBI BANK LIMITED VS SH. SATNAM SINGH AND OTHERS

¶20

Forty Five Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Forty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Kamlesh Sharma, Deputy General Manager , of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Copy of Delegation of Power, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 1 & 2, approached the applicant for Term Loan of Rs. 40.00 lacs & CC Limit of Rs. 8.00 lacs vide Loan Application dated 10.10.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no.3 stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs. 40.00 lacs and CC Limit of Rs. 8.00 lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 16.10.2017, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶22

4.	Defendant nos. 2 & 3 mortgaged their agricultural land as under:
i.	Defendant no. 3 mortgaged her land measuring 20Kanal-5Marla,
	situated at Village Khosa Kotla, Hadbast no. 305, Tehsil
	Dharamkot, District Moga, Punjab,
ii.	Defendant no. 2 mortgaged his land measuring 35Kanal-
	6³⁄₄Marla, situated at Village Khosa Kotla, Hadbast no. 305,
	Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Punjab,
	vide Declaration dated 18.10.2017 under Section 4(1) of the Punjab Agriculture Credit Operation and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978, which isAnnexure A4to this OA.
Docu	ments executed: Deed of Hypothecation dated 16.10.2017,
which	isAnnexure A5to this OA; Guarantee Agreement dated
16.10	.2017, which isAnnexure A6to this OA; Personal Guarantee
Agree	ment (Colly.) dated 16.10.2017, which isAnnexure A7to this
OA; D	emand Promissory Note dated 16.10.2017, which isAnnexure
A8to	this OA; Revival Letter dated 15.10.2018, which isAnnexure A9
to this	OA; Debt Acknowledgment Letter (Colly.) dated 15.10.2018 and
25.09	.2019, which isAnnexure A10to this OA; Recall Notice dated
27.04	.2021, which isAnnexure A11to this OA; Guarantee Recall

¶23

3 OA/ 255/2022 IDBI BANK LIMITED VS SH. SATNAM SINGH AND OTHERS

¶24

Notice dated 16.06.2021, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Account Statement, which is Annexure A13 to this OA.

¶25

5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA
and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts, there was a debit of Rs.38,45,194.48 (Rupees Thirty Eight Lac Forty Five Thousand
One Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Forty Eight Only), 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 the service of summons, Sh. Buta Singh Bairagi,
Advocate on behalf of defendant no.1, filed his Power of Attorney on
16.10.2024. Paper book was supplied on 07.11.2025. Thereafter, no WS was filed on behalf of defendant no. 1 within or even after expiry of
stipulated period. Therefore, opportunity to file WS by defendant no. 1 was closed and defense was struck of vide order dated 13.02.2026.
Since, no one appeared on behalf of defendant nos. 2 & 3, they were
proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 13.02.2026.
7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Kamlesh Sharma,Deputy
General Manager, IDBI Bank Limited,has been filed.
8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.
9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant, through
video conferencing, that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. None appeared on behalf of defendants for advancing arguments. From the perusal of all theAnnexures A1 to A13to this OA, it
is proved that the defendant nos. 1 & 2 approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities, which were granted to them. Defendant no. 3 stood
as guarantor. They had executed all the relevant documents in favour
of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per
terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties.
Subsequently, both the accounts of the defendants were classified as

¶26

4 OA/ 255/2022 IDBI BANK LIMITED VS SH. SATNAM SINGH AND OTHERS

¶27

NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.38,45,194.48 (Rupees Thirty Eight Lac Forty Five Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Forty Eight 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.

¶28

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant has claimed interest @10.55% p.a. plus penal interest @2.00% p.a. from 01.04.2021 till the realization.

¶29

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, 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 uniform simple interest @8.00% p.a. in both 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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.38,45,194.48 (Rupees Thirty Eight Lac Forty Five Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Forty Eight 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 mortgaged property of the defendant nos. 2 & 3 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.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

5 OA/ 255/2022

¶33

IDBI BANK LIMITED VS SH. SATNAM SINGH AND OTHERS

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 20.07.2026

¶36

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 .

¶37

Dated: 04.07.2026

¶38

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶39

Presiding Officer,

¶40

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Satnam Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Satnam 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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Ganga Road Lines and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Smt. Paramjit Kaur and Others

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Crystal Knitfab and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Shri Ram Cargo Movers and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Navkar Goods Carrier and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jasvir Singh and Another