Allowed

Yes Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Gurpreet Singh and Another

DRT21 Jul 2026OA/868/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Yes Bank Ltd. against the respondents. The bank recovered Rs. 21.57 lakhs as NPA. The Tribunal decided to recover Rs. 16.65 lakhs jointly and Rs. 4.91 lakhs individually with simple interest at 8% p.a. and ordered issuance of the Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 16,65,437.00 (jointly) and Rs. 4,91,879.95 (individually) with simple interest at 8% p.a.

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Gurpreet Singh and Another — Insurance | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 868/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.06.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 21.07.2026

¶6

Yes Bank Ltd., a Banking Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and carrying on Banking Business under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 having its Registered Office at Yes Bank House, Western Express Highway, Santacruz (East), Mumbai- 400055 and Regional Office at SCO no. 129-130, 2^nd Floor, Sector 9C, near CITCO Petrol Pump, Chandigarh- 160009 through Sh. Aashiv Bhayana, Authorized Officer, Legal Department

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Gurpreet Singh, S/o Sh. Malkit Singh

¶10

Smt. Beant Kaur Sidhu, W/o Sh. Gurpreet Singh

¶11

Both residents of Ward no. 01, Bhagha Purana, Moga, Punjab142038

¶12

2^nd Address: The Country Experts, Bagha Purana, District Moga, Punjab

¶13

…..Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. SC Prajapati, Advocate proxy for Sh. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for applicant (through VC)

¶16

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 16.07.2026)

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 21,57,316.95 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Fifty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Sixteen and Paise Ninety Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Aashiv Bhayana, Authorized Officer of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 28.03.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

2 OA NO. 868/2026 YES BANK LTD. VS. GURPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that defendants approached the applicant for grant of Auto Loan- I of Rs. 15,36,700.00 vide Loan Application dated 04.09.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Thereafter, defendants approached the applicant for grant of Auto Loan- II of Rs. 7,12,101.00 vide Loan Application dated 09.01.2025, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant of Personal Loan of Rs. 5.00 Lacs. 3. The applicant sanctioned Auto Loan- I of Rs. 14,56,265.00 vide Loan Agreement dated 11.09.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Auto Loan- II of Rs. 7,12,101.00 vide Loan Agreement dated 24.01.2025, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Personal Loan of Rs. 5.00 Lacs vide Loan Agreement dated 24.01.2025, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. 4. Defendants hypothecated their movable asset namely Thar LX D MT 4WD 4S HT bearing Registration no. PB29AF8338, Chassis no. MA1UJ4YK2P2H11465 and Engine no. YKP4H50642 vide RC, which is Annexure A8 to this OA. Documents executed: GST Registration Certificate dated 25.05.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Recall Notices dated 04.11.2023 and 11.03.2026, which are Annexure A9 and A10 to this OA; Account Statements with foreclosure, which are Annexure A11 to A16 to this OA and Judgment dated 05.03.2007, which is Annexure A17 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 21,57,316.95, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 16.07.2026.

¶21

3 OA NO. 868/2026 YES BANK LTD. VS. GURPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Aashiv Bhayana, Authorized Officer, Yes Bank Ltd. has been filed.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned proxy counsel (through VC) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case.

¶25

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A17 to this OA, it is proved that defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 16,65,437.00 (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Sixty Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Seven Only) from defendants, jointly and severally, and Rs. 4,91,879.95 (Rupees Four Lacs Ninety One Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Nine and Paise Ninety Five Only) from defendant no. 1, along with interest, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶26

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in clause 5 para 11. has claimed interest @20.00% p.a. plus 2% penal interest from the date of filing of the application till the realization.

¶27

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 asset, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 @8.00% p.a. in all the

¶28

4 OA NO. 868/2026 YES BANK LTD. VS. GURPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶29

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 defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.16,65,437.00 (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Sixty Five Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Seven Only) jointly and severally, and defendant no. 1 is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs. 4,91,879.95 (Rupees Four Lacs Ninety One Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Nine and Paise Ninety Five Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in all 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 asset of defendants 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 defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 05.08.2026. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants 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: 21.07.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Yes Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Gurpreet Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Gurpreet Singh and Another

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Gee Enterprises and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Funk and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Sharma Constructions and Others

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Jasdeep Singh and others

Yes Bank Limited versus Smt. Shivani and others

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Karanpreet Singh and another