Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Baldev Singh and another

DRT9 Mar 2026OA/54/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte Original Application under Section 19 RBI Act, the Tribunal allowed Bank of India to recover Rs. 26,91,059.81 from the principal debtor and guarantor. The Tribunal fixed uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and directed acceptance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 26,91,059.81 with simple interest at 8% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce via SARFAESI Act or attachment of assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.54/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.10.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 09.03.2026

¶6

Bank of India, a body corporate and a Nationalized Bank under the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970 with its H.O. at Bank of India, Star House, C-5, "G" Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 and amongst others a branch at Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga through Sh. Prasad Dwarka, Constituted Attorney of Applicant.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Baldev Singh S/o Sh. Mukand Singh, R/o Village Jangiana, Tehsil Tapa and District Barnala, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Gurnam Singh S/o Sh. Malkeet Singh,

¶11

since deceased, through his following legal heirs:

¶12

i. Smt. Paramjit Kaur W/d of Late Sh. Grunam Singh, R/o Viilage Madheke, Tehsil Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga, Punjab

¶13

ii. Sh. Jaskaran Singh S/o Late Sh. Gurnam Singh, R/o Viilage Madheke, Tehsil Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga, Punjab

¶14

………. Defendants

¶15

Advocates:

¶16

Argued by Ms. Seerat Sharma, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pankaj Beri, Advocate for Applicant

¶17

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 29.01.2026.

¶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.26,91,059.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Ninety One Thousand Fifty Nine & Paise Eighty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Prasad

¶20

¶21

OA/54/2024 BANK OF INDIA VS. BALDEV SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶22

Dwarka, Constituted Attorney of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 05.12.2016, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 01.09.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and for grant of Agriculture Overdraft (AGOD) Limit of Rs. 5.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 01.09.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 (since deceased) stood as guarantor. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.10.00 Lacs vide memorandum of sanction dated 14.10.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and sanctioned Agriculture Overdraft (AGOD) Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 16.10.2024 along with letter to Sub registrar for creation of charge, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. 4. Defendant no.1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 32Kanal situated at Village Mehar Singh Bhadaur, Tehsil Bhadaur, District Barnala, Punjab vide declaration dated 10.10.2014 u/s 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978, which is Annexure A10 to this OA. Documents executed : DP Notes, Hypothecation cum loan agreement, letter of declaration, undertaking & authority, Agreement, Deed of guarantee, all dated 16.10.2014, which are Annexures A4 to A9 to this OA; Acknowledgement of debts & securities dated 09.08.2017, 18.02.2019 & 17.02.2022, which are Annexures A11 to A16 to this OA; Legal notice dated 08.08.2023, which is Annexure A17 to this OA and Accounts statements, which are Annexures A18 and A19 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.26,91,059.81, which is recoverable and the defendant no.1 and defendant no. 2(since deceased) were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the

¶23

¶24

OA/54/2024 BANK OF INDIA VS. BALDEV SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶25

applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶26

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.01.2026.

¶27

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Prasad Dwarka, Constituted Attorney, Bank of India has been filed.

¶28

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶29

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. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A19 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no.1 approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities for which defendant no. 2 (since deceased) stood as guarantor. The loan facilities were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. They 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 is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,91,059.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Ninety One Thousand Fifty Nine & Paise Eighty One Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶30

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.65%p.a. in KCC and interest @13.65%p.a. in AGOD, with half yearly rests from 01.09.2023 till the realization.

¶31

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 defendants, quantum of loans and prevalent

¶32

¶33

OA/54/2024 BANK OF INDIA VS. BALDEV SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶34

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 uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both 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.

¶35

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.26,91,059.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Ninety One Thousand Fifty Nine & Paise Eighty One Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both 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 hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants 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.

¶36

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 26.03.2026.

¶39

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.

¶40

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶41

Dated: 09.03.2026

¶42

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶43

Presiding Officer,

¶44

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of India v. Sh. Baldev Singh and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Baldev Singh and another

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 Sh. Gurpreet Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Kula Majra and Company and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jasvinder Singh

Dimple versus Piramal Capital and Housing Finance and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sarabjit Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Gurwinder Singh and Another