Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Dimpal Rani

DRT19 Aug 2026OA/827/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993 filed by Union Bank of India against Smt. Dimpal Rani for recovery of outstanding loan dues of approximately Rs. 26.48 lakhs. The tribunal proceeded ex-parte as the defendant did not appear. It directed the recovery of the principal along with adjusted simple interest of 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 26,48,680.81 plus simple interest @ 08.00% p.a. from OA filing date until realization; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Dimpal Rani — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 827/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 02.06.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.08.2026

¶6

UNION BANK OF INDIA having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 having its Branch Office at Union Bank of India, Near N.K. Sharma, Group of Companies, Showroom No. 5-6, Chiranjiv Enclave, Zirakpur, District S.A.S Nagar (Mohali), Punjab140603, through its Authorised Officer, Smt. Divya Mishra, Branch Manager / Principle Officer.

¶7

.…..Applicant

¶8

Smt. Dimpal Rani wife of Sh. Sukhchain Singh, situated at Shop No. 1, Dashmesh Colony Zirakpur, S.A.S Nagar (Mohali), Punjab-140603. Second Address: Resident of Baba Deep Singh Colony, Near Church, Rajpura, S.A.S Nagar, Punjab-140603.

¶9

………. Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Advocate for Applicant

¶12

None for Defendant (Already ex parte vide order dated 17.08.2026)

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.26,48,680.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty and Paise Eighty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Smt. Divya Mishra, Branch Manager, of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 07.08.2018, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs.23.75 Lacs and CC Limit of

¶16

2 OA/827/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SMT. DIMPAL RANI

¶17

Rs.15.67 lacs vide Loan Application dated 05.08.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.23.75 Lacs and CC Limit of Rs.15.67 lacs vide Sanctioned Letter dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated her stock and machinery purchased out of bank finance vide Hypothecation (Goods) Agreement dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Documents executed : General Term Loan Agreement dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Demand Promissory Note dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Letter of General Lien & Set of dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Letter of Continuity dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Interest Agreement dated 11.08.2023, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; CERSAI, Security Interest ID Based Search Report dated 30.07.2024, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Legal Notice along with the Postal receipts dated 26.02.2026, which are Annexure A12 (colly) to this OA; Statement of Account, along with memoranda supported with certificate under Banker Book Evidence Act dated 28.04.2026, which are Annexure A13 (colly) to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.26,48,680.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty and Paise Eighty One Only), which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but she did not repay the 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 but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and she was proceeded ex-parte on 17.08.2026

¶18

3 OA/827/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SMT. DIMPAL RANI

¶19

In support of the OA, affidavit of Smt. Divya Mishra, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶20

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A13 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities, which were granted to her and for that she had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, both the accounts of the defendant were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.26,48,680.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty and Paise Eighty One 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 @11.55% p.a. from 01.04.2026 till the realization.

¶21

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 assets, 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 uniform simple interest @08.00% p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.26,48,680.81 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty and

¶22

¶23

OA/827/2026

¶24

UNION BANK OF INDIA VS SMT. DIMPAL RANI

¶25

Paise Eighty One Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00% p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date 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 hypothecated assets 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.

¶26

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶27

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶28

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 03.09.2026 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated:19.08.2026

¶29

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Dimpal Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Dimpal Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Sarup Singh and others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Bachan Ram Alias Bachna Ram and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Jasmail Kaur and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Jaswant Singh and Another

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari and Another

Bank of Maharashtra versus Smt. Kiran Jot and others