Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sh. Satbir Singh

DRT29 Apr 2026OA/305/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte Original Application filed by Canara Bank against Sh. Satbir Singh for recovery of Rs. 25,43,018.78. The court issued a Recovery Certificate, directed sale of mortgaged assets, and fixed simple interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed 13.70%.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; defendant liable to pay Rs. 25,43,018.78 with costs and simple interest @8% p.a. claim enforceable via sale of mortgaged/attachment of personal assets.

Canara Bank versus Sh. Satbir Singh — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.305/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.02.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.04.2026

¶6

Canara Bank, a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking's) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 112, J.C. Road, Bangalore and inter-alia Branch Office at Bhurekohna, Tarn Taran, Punjab

¶7

……..Applicant Versus Sh. Satbir Singh, S/o Sh. Jagtar Singh, R/o Village Manawa, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punja b

¶8

………. Defendant Advocates:

¶9

Argued by Sh. Gurnam Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Atul Goyal, Advocate for applicant (through VC) None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 23.04.2026)

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 25,43,018.78 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Forty Three Thousand Eighteen and Paise Seventy Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Surinder Kumar Arora, Constituted Attorney/Officer of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 03.08.2001, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 12.00 Lacs vide Application dated 09.10.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant approached the applicant for enhancement of KCC Limit of Rs. 14.54 Lacs vide Application and Letter of Renewal, both dated 31.10.2018, which are Annexure A11 and A12 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 12.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 10.09.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA

¶12

2 OA/305/2026 CANARA BANK VS. SATBIR SINGH

¶13

and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the enhancement of KCC Limit of Rs. 14.54 Lacs vide Sanction Memorandum dated 31.10.2018, which is Annexure A15 to this OA.

¶14

Defendant mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 32K situated at Village Manawa, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 840 dated 04.10.2013 and Jamabandi for the year 2008-2009, which are Annexure A4 and A23 to this OA.

¶15

Documents executed: Deed of Hypothecation, Certificate of Loan Papers, Letter evidencing Execution of Documents, Addendum of Renewal and Affidavit, all dated 09.10.2013, which are Annexure A5 to A9 to this OA; Link Letter, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Letter evidencing Execution of Documents, Letter of Attestation/Declaration and Certificate of Loan Papers, all dated 31.10.2018, which are Annexure A13, A14 and A16 to this OA; Acknowledgments of Debt and Security dated 16.06.2016, 18.01.2019, 24.02.2021, 28.03.2023 and 02.07.2025, which are Annexure A17 to A21 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 17.06.2022, which is Annexure A22 to this OA; Orders dated 07.08.2024 and 14.09.2024, which is Annexure A24 (Colly) to this OA and Account Statement with certificate, which is Annexure A25 to this OA. 5. 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. 25,43,018.78 which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 23.04.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Surinder Kumar Arora, Authorized Signatory, Canara Bank, has been filed.

¶16

3 OA/305/2026 CANARA BANK VS. SATBIR SINGH

¶17

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶18

It was argued by learned proxy counsel (through VC) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶19

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A25 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility 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. 25,43,018.78 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Forty Three Thousand Eighteen and Paise Seventy Eight Only) along with interest from the defendant from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @13.70%p.a. with half yearly rests from 11.12.2025 till the realization.

¶20

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 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 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.

¶21

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,43,018.78 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Forty Three Thousand Eighteen and Paise Seventy Eight Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00% p.a. in the loan account from the date of

¶22

4 OA/305/2026 CANARA BANK VS. SATBIR SINGH

¶23

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 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.

¶24

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 20.05.2026. 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: 29.04.2026

¶25

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Canara Bank v. Sh. Satbir Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sh. Satbir 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

Canara Bank versus Sh. Ashwani Jindal and Others

Union Bank of India versus Ms Shree Shyam Enterprises and Another

State Bank of India versus Smt. Sarita Vohra and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pargat Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Lakhvir Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh.JAsvir Singh