Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Balwant Singh

DRT23 Jun 2026OA/289/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte proceeding under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, the Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 25.73 lacs. It approved the principal amount but modified the interest rate from 11% to 8% p.a., authorizing recovery via hypothecated machinery.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 25,73,953.32 with simple interest at 8% p.a. via sale of hypothecated machinery; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Balwant Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 289/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.02.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.06.2026

¶6

Union Bank of India, (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) a Body Corporate Constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Central office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 and inter alia a Branch Offices at SCF-35, New Grain Market, Muktsar, Punjab through its Branch Manager, Sh. Harjinder Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. B alwant Singh S/o Sh. Sona Singh R/o Pind Ranjitgarh, Ranjitgarh, Tehsil and District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab.

¶9

.……Defendant

¶10

Advocate:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Ankit Kaushal, Advocate proxy for Sh. Karan Singla, Advocate for the applicant

¶12

None for Defendant (already ex parte vide order dated 20.06.2026)

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.25,73,953.32 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Three and Paise Thirty Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Harjinder Singh, Branch Manager , of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 15.12.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.23.80 Lacs for purchase of

¶16

¶17

OA/289/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BALWANT SINGH

¶18

Combine Harvester, vide Loan Application dated 07.07.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.23.80 Lacs vide Sanctioned Letter dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶20

Defendant hypothecated his Combine Harvester bearing Registration No. PB30AA2492, Make MATHARU ENGINEERING AGRI WORKS, Model No. MATHARU 4600, Engine No. VPH488444, Chassis No. MEAW46001231615, vide Hypothecation of Vehicle Agreement dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Copy of Registration Certificate dated 19.09.2023, which is Annexure A13 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed : Term Loan Agreement (Hypothecation of Movables) dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Interest Agreement dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Letter of Continuity dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Agreement to be stamped as Simple Agreement dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Simple Loan Agreement (For Agricultural Advances) dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Hypothecation (Vehicles) Agreement dated 14.07.2023, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Quotation dated 10.07.2024, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Notice dated 08.02.2025, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Account Statement with Certificate by Banker, which is Annexure A15 to this OA.

¶22

The account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account, there was a debit of Rs.25,73,953.32 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Three and Paise Thirty Two only), which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶23

¶24

OA/289/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BALWANT SINGH

¶25

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal and no one appeared on behalf of defendant. Hence, he was proceeded ex-parte on 20.06.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Harjinder Singh, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel, that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶26

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A15 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the Term Loan, which was granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.25,73,953.32 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Three and Paise Thirty Two only), along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶27

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00% p.a. plus 2.00% p.a. penal interest with quarterly rests from 01.11.2025 till the realization.

¶28

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 hypothecated machinery, undertaking of the defendant, 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

¶29

¶30

OA/289/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BALWANT SINGH

¶31

deems it just and appropriate to grant simple interest @08.00% 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,73,953.32 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Three and Paise Thirty Two only), with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00% 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 machinery of the defendant 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 defendant. 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 08.07.2026 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant 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: 23.06.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Balwant Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Balwant 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

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Gurmit Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus M/S Nutech Engineers Inc. and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Ravinder Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Ragvendra Singh

State Bank of India versus Smt. Gurpreet Kaur

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Parvinder Singh and Another