Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Harbhej Singh

DRT22 Apr 2026OA/697/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for recovery of a loan of ₹18 Lacs plus interest from defendants who failed to repay. The court proved the case and directed recovery from mortgaged land and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹21,47,656.91 with interest; joint and several liability; recovery from mortgaged land and personal property; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 697/2023 Date of Institution: 29.03.2023 Date of Decision: 22.04.2026

¶4

Union Bank of India having its branches all over India and a branch at Jandiala, Tehsil Tarn Taran, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Mr. Harbhej Singh s/o Sh. Sardool Ram, r/o VPO Kalla, Tehsil Khadoor Sahib, Tarn Taran, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶8

Mr. Angrej Singh s/o Sh. Sardool Ram, r/o VPO Kalla, Tehsil Khadoor Sahib, Tarn Taran, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶9

Mr. Narinder Singh s/o Sh. Balbir Singh, r/o VPO Kalla, Tehsil Khadoor Sahib, Tarn Taran, District Amritsar, Punjab.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Ms. Aman, Nodal Officer for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 21.07.2025 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of ₹21,47,656.91p with interest @9.65% per annum with yearly rests from 29.03.2023.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Union Bank of India has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹21,47,656.91p with interest against Mr. Harbhej Singh and others (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 27.03.2015, it had granted a loan of ₹18.00Lacs to defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his agricultural land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.3 stood as the guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @9.65% per annum with yearly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 27.07.2021 and

¶17

¶18

16.02.2023. On 31.01.2023, a sum of ₹21,47,656.91p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 09.05.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 21.07.2025, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Abhishek Pandey, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-22. 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 ₹18.00Lacs and on 31.01.2023, a sum of ₹21,47,656.91p was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹21,47,656.91p (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Forty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Six and Paise Ninety One Only) with interest @9.65% per annum with yearly rests from 29.03.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged agricultural land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶21

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 26.05.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the

¶22

¶23

mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. 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: 22.04.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Harbhej Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Harbhej 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

Anil Kumar C versus Federal Bank

Mujeeb Rahman P v C versus Axis Bank

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Jagdish Singh

Nipun Jain versus State Bank of India

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Sh. Sukhdev Singh Alias Sukha Singh

Nipun Jain So Surinder Pal Jain versus State Bank of India