PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK vs ASHOKA KUMAR AND ANR on 23 December 2025

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 30.09.2020 before DRT-III Delhi and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sd- sum of Rs.31,32,975/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Five only) as on 04.08.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest @24% per annum with monthly rest from 05.08.2020 till the date of realization and costs.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant No.1 & 2 as co-borrowers vide loan application with KYC documents, the applicant bank sanctioned housing loan facility of Rs.64,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Four Lacs only) on 29.09.2015 as per request to Defendants @10.00% interest per annum with monthly rests to be repayable in 240 EMI of Rs.61,761.39 for purchasing fully constructed property bearing 2nd Floor, Plot No.E-9, Panchsheel Garden, Naveen Shandara, Delhi. The applicant bank disbursed the amount directly to the vendor/seller of above property as per request of defendants dated 29.09.2015. Further, on the request of defendants, the applicant bank sanctioned overdraft facility of Rs.22.00 lacs (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs only) @10.10% interest per annum on 19.12.2015 for personal need against mortgaged property.

3. That in order to avail both the loan facilities, the defendant no.1 & 2 submit loan applications and executed Sanction Letter, Loan Agreement and Agreement for Overdraft, Power of Attorney on 29.09.2015 and 21.12.2015.

4. The defendant no.1 & 2 executed balance & security confirmation letter dated 31.12.2017 and 01.12.2018 with the applicant bank.

5. It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing both the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions and failed to fulfill their legal obligationdespite several reminders but defendants failed to regularize the account in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the account was declared NPA on 12.03.2021 by the applicant bank and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues. The applicant bank issued recall notice dated 19.04.2021 to defendants to pay the dues but there was no response from the defendants.

6. Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 29.08.2022, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte due to non-filing of written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets before this Tribunal.

7. In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Vinod Kumar Miya, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as General Power of Attorney Exhibit AW1/1, Loan Application Exhibit AW1/2, Sanction Letter Exhibit AW1/3, Loan Agreement for Housing Loan Exhibit AW1/4, Loan Application for Overdraft Exhibit AW1/5, Sanction of Overdraft Exhibit AW1/6, Agreement for Overdraft Exhibit AW1/7,Legal Notice & Corrigendum Notice Exhibit AW1/8 (Colly), Balance & Security Confirmation Exhibit AW1/9 (Colly), Statement of Account under Banker's Books Evidence Act and Indian Evidence Act Exhibit AW1/10(Colly.

8. The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved. 5d-

9. The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

10. As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

11. In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay, jointly or severally, to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.31,32,975/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Five only) as on 04.08.2020 along with pendentelite and future interest ©12.00% per annum with monthly rest from 05.08.2020 and costs till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants as no mortgage of property was created for which housing loan was sanctioned by the applicant bank to the defendants.

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi. (III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 20.02.2026. (IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost. (GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI (Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 23.12.2025