Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Pargat Singh

DRT29 Apr 2026OA/422/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application in an ex-parte proceeding for recovery of Rs. 24.54 lakh. The court granted liability and directed recovery via sale of hypothecated assets, capping future interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate to be issued; sum of Rs. 24.54 lakh declared recoverable including interest at 8% p.a.; recovery from sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 422/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 13.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.04.2026

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act No. 5 of 1970, having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai and its Branch Office, at Union Bank of India, Grain Market, Bhadson, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab-147202, through its Authorized Representative Sh. Manpreet Singh, Senior Manage, Union Bank of India, Grain Market, Bhadson, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab-147202.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Pargat Singh S/o Sh. Major Singh, R/o Village Tanda Badha Kalan, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib-147203

¶10

……….Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Rehan Chaudhary, Advocate for the Applicant (through VC)

¶13

None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 23.04.2026)

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.24,54,451.30 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Four Hundred Fifty One and Paise Thirty Only). The Original Application has been filed Sh. Manpreet Singh, Senior Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 24.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

¶17

OA NO.422/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. PRAGAT SINGH

¶18

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan for purchase of Combine Harvester of Rs.24.90 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 14.08.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.24.90 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 14.08.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated his moveable asset i.e. Combine Harvesters, Make: INDERPREET AGRO INDUSTRIES., Model No. INDER 930, Bearing Registration No. PB23AB0287, Engine No. RNHM105892, Chassis No. IA1930H240041 vide Provisional Registration Certificate of Combine Harvester dated 30.08.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Documents executed: Term Loan Agreement dated 16.08.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreements dated 16.08.2024, which are Annexures A6 and A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 23.02.2026, along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A9 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.24,54,451.30, 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. 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. Manpreet Singh, Senior Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶20

¶21

OA NO.422/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. PRAGAT SINGH

¶22

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

¶23

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 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.24,54,451.30 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Four Hundred Fifty One and Paise Thirty 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 pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. plus 2% penal interest with half yearly rest from the 29.02.2026 till realization. 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, 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.24,54,451.30 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Four Hundred Fifty One

¶24

¶25

OA NO.422/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. PRAGAT SINGH

¶26

and Paise Thirty 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 vehicle 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 18.05.2026 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

¶27

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

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Pargat Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sh. Pargat 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

Canara Bank versus Sh. Satbir Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pargat Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Lakhvir Singh