Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Gurpinder Singh and Others

DRT7 Jul 2026OA/310/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of approximately Rs. 51.31 lakhs against borrowers and a guarantor. The Tribunal awarded simple interest at 8% per annum instead of the claimed rate and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 51,31,448.74 with simple interest at 8% per annum payable from date of filing.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Gurpinder Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 310/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 13.02.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 07.07.2026

¶6

H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd., a Banking Company carrying on the Banking Business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400011 whereas one of its Branch at “Ismailabad, Haryana” through Sh. Vivek Singh, Deputy Manager (Agriculture Legal), H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd., Regional Office, District Mohali, Punjab being Power of Attorney Holder/Authorized Officer

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Gurpinder Singh, S/o Sh. Nishan Singh, R/o Village Mohalgarh, Tehsil Dudan Sadhan, District Patiala, Punjab147005

¶10

Sh. Nishan Singh, S/o Sh. Jangir, R/o Village Mohalgarh, District Patiala, Punjab- 147005

¶11

Sh. Sahib Singh, S/o Sh. Jagir Singh, R/o Village Mohalgarh, Tehsil and District Patiala, Punjab- 147005

¶12

…..Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Vaibhav Kumar, Advocate proxy for Sh. Dheeraj Gautam, Advocate for applicant

¶15

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 09.06.2026)

¶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. 51,31,448.74 (Rupees Fifty One Lacs Thirty One Thousand Four Hundred Forty Eight and Paise Seventy Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Vivek Singh, Deputy Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute

¶18

2 OA NO. 310/2026 HDFC BANK LTD. VS. GURPINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶19

the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 21.03.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached the applicant for grant of CC Limit of Rs. 27,97,080.00 and Term Loan of Rs. 7,18,575.00 vide Loan Application Form dated 07.07.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs. 27.95 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 7.15 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 03.08.2015, which are Annexure A3 and A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶22

Defendant no. 2 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 48K 00M situated at Mohalgarh/289, Sub Tehsil Dudhan Sudhan, District Patiala, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4 (1) of the Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978 and Mutation Letter, both dated 06.08.2015, which are Annexure A8 and A9 to this OA.

¶23

Documents executed: DP Note and Agreement cum Guarantee cum Hypothecation Deeds, all dated 07.08.2015, which are Annexure A5 to A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 01.02.2025, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Statement of Accounts, which are Annexure A11 to A13 to this OA.

¶24

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 51,31,448.74, 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.

¶25

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 09.06.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Vivek Singh, Deputy Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd. has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

3 OA NO. 310/2026 HDFC BANK LTD. VS. GURPINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶27

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 A13 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant nos. 1 and 2 approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. Defendants had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 51,31,448.74 (Rupees Fifty One Lacs Thirty One Thousand Four Hundred Forty Eight and Paise Seventy Four 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. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.00%p.a. plus @2% penal interest p.a. with half yearly rests from 31.01.2025 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 assets/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 simple interest @8.00% p.a. in all 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.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.51,31,448.74 (Rupees Fifty One Lacs Thirty One Thousand Four

¶30

4 OA NO. 310/2026 HDFC BANK LTD. VS. GURPINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶31

Hundred Forty Eight and Paise Seventy Four Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in all 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 defendant no. 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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 22.07.2026. 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: 07.07.2026

¶33

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶34

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Gurpinder Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Sh. Gurpinder 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

Indian Bank versus Sh. Amanpreet Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Harjit Trading Co. and Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Neha Enterprises and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Goyal Trading Company and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Satpal Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Vijay Kumar