Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Smt. Sukhdev Kaur and Others

DRT29 May 2026OA/271/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 25,78,428 plus interest. The court granted simple interest at 8% p.a., reduced from the claimed 14.70%. A Recovery Certificate was issued and execution proceedings were permitted.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 25,78,428 with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce under SARFAESI Act.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Smt. Sukhdev Kaur and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.271/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.05.2026

¶6

Indian Overseas Bank, a body corporate, duly constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Central Office at 762, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600002 and one of its Branches at Raikot, District Ludhiana through Sh. Vishram Meena, Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Raikot Branch, District Ludhiana its Principal Officer and Constituted Attorney.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Sukhdev Kaur W/o Sh. Jangir Singh,

¶10

Sh. Tarlochan Singh S/o Sh. Jangir Singh,

¶11

Sh. Hardev Singh S/o Sh. Mal Singh,

¶12

All residents of Village & Post Office Chhiniwal Kalan, Tehsil &

District Barnala.

……..Defendants

Advocates:

Argued by Ms. Sukhu, Advocate proxy for Sh. R.V. Mehra, Advocate for the applicant (through VC)

¶17

None for Defendants (Already ex-parte vide order dated 26.05.2026).

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

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.25,78,428.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Vishram Meena, Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 04.09.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

2 OA/271/2025

¶21

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS SMT. SUKHDEV KAUR AND OTHERS

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant nos. 1 & 2 approached the applicant for grant of Kisan Cash Credit Limit of Rs.9,00,000.00 vide Application form for Agricultural Credit dated 01.03.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; 3. The applicant sanctioned the Kisan Cash Credit Limit of Rs.9,00,000.00 vide Sanction Letter dated 12.03.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. 4. Defendant nos. 1 & 2 mortgaged their Immovable Properties i.e, total Land measuring 11 Kanals 0 Marlas situated at Village Chhiniwal Kalan-B, Tehsil and District Barnala vide Simple Mortgaged Deed bearing vasika no. 5099 dated 08.03.2013 along with its translation, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA;

¶23

Documents executed: Demand Promissory Note, Bearer Letter (F16), Letter of Hypothecation, Agreement of Guarantee, Consent cum Authorization Letter, all dated 12.03.2013, which are Annexures A4 to A6, A9 & A10 to this OA; Statement of Account along with Certificate, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 13.04.2023 along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A12 to A15 to this OA; Revival Letters dated 05.01.2016, 06.10.2018, which are Annexures A16 & A17 to this OA.

¶24

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.25,78,428.00, 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 but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 26.05.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Vishram Meena, Manager and Principal Officer, Indian Overseas Bank has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶25

3 OA/271/2025

¶26

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS SMT. SUKHDEV KAUR AND OTHERS

¶27

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.

¶28

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A17 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant nos. 1 & 2 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them, defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, loan account was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.25,78,428.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty 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.

¶29

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @14.70%p.a. with half yearly rests till the realization.

¶30

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

¶31

instant case including nature of the mortgaged properties/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.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶33

¶34

OA/271/2025

¶35

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS SMT. SUKHDEV KAUR AND OTHERS

¶36

Rs.25,78,428.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty Eight 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 mortgaged properties of the defendant nos. 1 & 2 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.

¶37

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 19.06.2026.

¶40

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.

¶41

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶42

Dated: 29.05.2026

¶43

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶44

Presiding Officer,

¶45

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Indian Overseas Bank v. Smt. Sukhdev Kaur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Smt. Sukhdev Kaur 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

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Saas Foods

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Mehar Deen

Bank of India versus Sh. Tehal Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Messrs Pilwan Earth Movers and Others

Hdfc Bank Litmited versus Sh. Harbans Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Amar Singh and Others