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 and no one appeared on behalf of defendant. Hence, he was proceeded ex-parte on 11.08.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sukhad Arora, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex parte arguments and perused record. 9. 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. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A18 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.24,60,977.02 (Rupees Twenty Four Lac Sixty Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Seven and Paise Two only), along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount. 10. 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 24.02.2026 till the 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 asset, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising
