Allowed

Bank of India v. Sh. Manmohan Singh

DRT30 Apr 2026OA/595/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application under RDB Act sec 19 by the Bank of India for recovery of approximately Rs. 47.85 lakhs. The Court recorded the defendant's ex-parte status due to non-appearance and non-deposit of costs, finding the loan account irregular and decreed the bank's claim with simple interest.

What did the court decide?

The defendant is liable to pay Rs.47,85,517.19 with costs and simple interest at 7.35% p.a. from the date of filing of OA till realization. Applicant is entitled to recover the amount from sale of mor

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.595/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 25.04.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 30.04.2026

¶6

Bank of India, a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act no. V of 1970, having its Head Office at “Star House”, C-5, Block G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400051 and Branch Office amongst other places at 1^st Floor, Guru Teg Bahadur Market, Clock Tower, Ludhiana, Punjab through its duly Constituted Attorney, Sh. Kailash Krishna Bhatt, Chief Manager, Zonal Office, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Manmohan Singh, S/o Sh. Surjit Singh, R/o House no. 762, Street no. 4, Nirankari Mohalla, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶9

………. Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Ms. Lovedeep Kaur, Advocate proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for applicant

¶12

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

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 47,85,517.19 (Rupees Forty Seven Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen and Paise Nineteen Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Kailash Krishna Bhatt, Chief Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Authority Letter dated 24.10.2018, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of Housing Loan of Rs. 41.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 02.05.2018, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶15

2 OA/595/2023 BANK OF INDIA VS. MANMOHAN SINGH

¶16

The applicant sanctioned the Housing Loan of Rs. 41.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 09.05.2018, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 177 Sq. Yards situated at Village Gill 2, Jasdev Nagar, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Title Deed bearing vasika no. 1855 dated 23.05.2018 along with its translation and Letter of Confirming of Title Deed, which are Annexure A8, 8T and A9 to this OA.

¶17

Documents Executed: ID Proof of defendant, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; DP Note, Agreement for Home Loan, Letter of Declaration, Undertaking and Authority, Agreement and MCLR Loan Agreement, all dated 11.05.2018, which are Annexure A5 to A7, A10 and A11 to this OA; CERSAI Letter, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Acknowledgement of Debt dated 05.05.2021, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A14 to this OA; Demand Notice u/s 13 (2), SARFAESI Act, 2002 dated 26.08.2020, which is Annexure A15 to this OA and Possession Notice u/s 13 (4), SARFESI Act, 2002, which is Annexure A16 to this OA.

¶18

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the account there was a debit of Rs. 47,85,517.19 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.

¶19

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal. Sh. Lakhbir Singh, Advocate appeared on 14.08.2024 and he along with Sh. Sahil Khunger, Advocate have filed Memo of Appearance on behalf of defendant. WS was filed beyond stipulated period on 04.03.2025 which was accepted subject to cost. After several opportunities, defendant neither deposited cost nor appeared thereafter. None appeared on behalf of defendant on 23.04.2026. Therefore, proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 23.04.2026.

¶20

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Kailash Krishna Bhatt, Chief Manager, Bank of India h as been filed.

¶21

3 OA/595/2023 BANK OF INDIA VS. MANMOHAN SINGH

¶22

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶23

It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant had proved its case.

¶24

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A16 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. 47,85,517.19 (Rupees Forty Seven Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen and Paise Nineteen Only), along with interest from the defendant from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶25

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @7.35%p.a. plus @2% penal interest with monthly rests from 01.04.2023 till the realization.

¶26

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, 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 @7.35% 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.

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.47,85,517.19 (Rupees Forty Seven Lacs Eighty Five Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen and Paise Nineteen Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @7.35% p.a. in the loan account from the date

¶28

¶29

OA/595/2023 BANK OF INDIA VS. MANMOHAN SINGH

¶30

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 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.

¶31

13. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.05.2026 16. 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.

¶34

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶35

Dated: 30.04.2026

¶36

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶37

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Bank of India v. Sh. Manmohan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sh. Manmohan 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

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Ranjeet Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. chamkaur singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Nawab Resturant and Another

Savita Prabhakar versus Punjab National Bank and Others

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Brij Pal and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Parveen Kumar and Others