Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Jaswinder Kaur

DRT25 Aug 2026OA/584/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DT appeared on behalf of IDBI Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues. The defendants appeared neither for nor against the application. The Tribunal allowed the application decreeing the amount with interest and passing order for sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

The application for recovery of ₹26,70,703/- with interest is allowed. Recovery Certificate be issued. Sale of mortgaged land and personal properties of defendants directed.

Idbi Bank versus Jaswinder Kaur — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 584/2023 Date of Institution: 27.03.2023 Date of Decision: 25.08.2026

¶4

IDBI Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Sutheri Road, Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Jaswinder Kaur w/o Sh. Ranjit Singh, r/o Sarishatpur bastimanak, Dheri Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶8

Parminder Singh s/o Sh. Kuldeep Singh, r/o Village Sarishatpur, Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Deepal Tamang proxy counsel for Sh. R.S Badhran, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- ex parte vide order dated 16.07.2025 .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of ₹26,70,703/- with interest @9.05% per annum with half-yearly rests from 27.03.2023.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

IDBI Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹26,70,703/- with interest against Smt. Jaswinder Kaur and another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 26.02.2016, it had granted a loan of ₹20.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged her land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor for the aforementioned limit vide Common Guarantee Deed dated 29.02.2016. The loan was chargeable to interest @9.05% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their

¶16

¶17

liability towards the debt on 26.12.2018. On 31.05.2022, a sum of ₹26,70,703/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 21.04.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 16.07.2025, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶19

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Manish Kumar Lakhanpal, Assistant General Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-23. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of ₹20.00 Lacs and on 31.05.2022, a sum of ₹26,70,703/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹26,70,703/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Seventy Thousand Seven Hundred Three Only) with interest @9.05% per annum with half-yearly rests from 27.03.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 28.09.2026.

¶20

¶21

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 25.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Idbi Bank v. Jaswinder Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Jaswinder Kaur

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

Rajinder Kaur Chhabra versus Aavas Financiers Limited

Karur Vysya Bank versus Singh Communication

State Bank of India versus Vijay Naithani and Ors.

Federal Bank versus Mr. Sajjan Dhingra

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Sumit Ornament House

Union Bank of India versus Sh Raman Sharma and Ors.