Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Karnaiil Singh

DRT25 Aug 2026OA/734/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex parte application filed by Punjab National Bank to recover a KCC loan limit. The court permitted recovery of principal and interest via hypothecated crops, mortgaged land, and personal property, issuing a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 21,17,835.91 plus interest via sale of hypothecated crops, mortgaged land, and property. Recovery certificate issued.

Punjab National Bank versus Karnaiil Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 734/2023 Date of Institution: 05.04.2023 Date of Decision: 25.08.2026

¶4

Punjab National Bank, B/u VPO Kandhala Jattan, Tehsil & District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

…Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Karnail Singh S/o Sh. Ganda Singh R/o Village & Post Office Kandhali Naurangpur, Tehsil Dasuya & Distt. Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶8

…Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Sh.J.S. Bagga, Counsel for the Applicant Bank. Defendant – ex parte .

¶11

OA for the Recovery of Rs.21,17,835.91p with interest @12.25% per annum with half-yearly rests from 05.04.2023.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

On 05.04.2023, Punjab National Bank filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.21,17,835.91p with interest against Sh. Karnail Singh (defendant).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 25.05.2015, it had granted a KCC limit of Rs.15Lacs to the defendant for agricultural purpose. To secure the limit, defendant had hypothecated crops and mortgaged his agricultural land (fully detailed in para No.5.4 and 5.5 of the application respectively). The limit was chargeable to interest @12.25% per annum with half-yearly rests. The defendant had acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 23.06.2017 and 20.06.2020. On 02.10.2022, a sum of Rs.21,17,835.91p was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

¶16

3. On 12.05.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 22.09.2025, he was proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Vinod Kumar Verma, Sr. Manager, along with the loan and security documents.
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 a KCC limit of Rs.15Lacs and on 02.10.2022, a sum of Rs.21,17,835.91p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the Bank for the recovery of
Rs.21,17,835.91p (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Seventeen Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Five and Paise Ninety One Only) with interest @12.25% per annum with half-yearly rests from 05.04.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of
hypothecated crops and mortgaged land (fully detailed in para No.5.4 and
5.5 of the application, respectively) as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant.
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.
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: 25.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh HARSH

Punjab National Bank v. Karnaiil Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Karnaiil 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

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.