PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK vs MS.SHAGUN SACHDEVA on 25 August 2026

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 02.05.2022 through Shri. Meghraj Navariya, Officer of the applicant ban( under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,57,49,818/- together with cost, charges and pendentellite and future interest @20.00o/o from date of filing of this O.A. till the realization in full.

2. The brief facts of the case are that at the request of the defendant nos.l & 2, the applicant bank sanctioned two Housing Loan Credit Facility of Rs.54,00,0001- ,vide sanction letter dated 18.04.2019 towards purchase of Unit no.1706, Tower-2A, Speedway Avenue, Jaypee Greens Sports City, GNIDA, S.\

TA NO. 458/2022

Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh and Rs.1,05,57,000/-, vide its sanction letter dated 18.04.2019 towards purchase of Unit no. P-1806, 18h Floor, Tower-2A, Speedway Avenue, Jaypee Greens Sports City, GNIDA, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh. The defendants executed all necessary loaning documents on 26.04.2019 and27.04.2019. A Tripartite Agreement dated 26.04.2019 executed between defendant nos.l & 2 and defendant no.3 with the applicant bank. In order to secure the repayment of the first housing loan facility, the defendant nos.1 and 2 have mortgaged the flat bearing Unit no.1706, Tower-2A, Speedway Avenue, Jaypee Greens Sports City, GNIDA, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh in favour of the applicant bank. In order to secure the repayment ofthe second housing loan facility, the defendant nos.1 and 2 have mortgaged the flat bearing Unit no. P-1806, 18h Floor, Tower-2A, Speedway Avenue, Jaypee Greens Spofts City, GNIDA, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh in favour of the applicant bank.

3. It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized thb toan facility, but failed to maintain the financial discipline and failed to repay the due amounts. The applicant bank requested the defendants to regularize the loan account by visits and letters, but there was no response from the defendants. Therefore, the applicant bank served a legal notice dated 27.10.202L to the defendants, demanding the amount due as on that date, but failed to recover the same. Thus, the present O.A|I.A. is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues. x\

TANO. 45812022

4. On notice by this Tribunal, defendants failed to put appeirance at all, despite service. Accordingly, the defendants were proceeded against exparte dated 09.04.2025.

5. The applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Mr. Meghraj Navariya, Officer of the applicant bank as Annexure A-1 to Annexure A-12 which have gone unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, the case of the applicant bank stands fully established against the defendants with respect to nonpayment of EMI/ outstanding amount.

6. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the applicant bank and perused the records. From perusal of the record, it is clear that at the time of executing loan documents the applicant bank has entered into a Tripaftite Agreement with the builder along with the borrower. Para 6 of the Tripartite Agreement is as follows:- "6. ff the bonower/s withdnw/s fiom tlte scheme or fail/s to pay the blane amount rcprcenting the differcne between the housing loan allowed by the Bank and the actual cost of the house/flat (including esalation) or di,e/s orallotmentof the tlat/hou* is othenvi* cancelledt llte enthe amount sbnding to the aedit of the funower/s (including matgin money and bonower/s contribution) will be rcfunded by the Builder to the Bank The Bank shall rcfund to the bonower/s blane, id any, after adiusting the entll ou&bnding dues, CI

TANO. 4s812022

includinginterest,o# and other amount ruovenble by the bank fiom the bonower/s."

7. As per conditions contained in the Tripartite Agreement at 26.04.2019 at para no.6, in case of default by the borrower the amount which has been paid by the borrower to the builder has to be returned to the bank. In the present case the borrower has made default in repayment of the EMIs and therefore, as per condition agreed between the parties, the builder is under obligation to return the entire amount which he has received from the borrower or from the applicant bank in lieu of the payment of the construction of the flat. Moreover, from the perusal of the entire facts it is apparent that the borrower has taken the loan and the loan amount has been paid to the builder for construction of the flat. The applicant bank has not claimed that the builder in violation of the terms and conditions has handed over the flat to the defendant nos.1 and 2. The borrower has not taken any amount in his account and the entire amount has been paid to the builder. In addition to this the borrower has also paid the margin money to the builder and also paid certain EMIs as mentioned by the applicant bank. The borrower has not got the possession of the flat. If the borrower is directed to pay the amount which has been actually paid to the builder this will amount double penalty on the borrower. The borrower has received no money and has still paid the margin money and also certain EMIs to the bank and has got in return nothing. In such circumstances and as per agreed terms and conditions it is only the builder who is liable to pay the defaulted amount to the applicant bank. 9-\

TA NO. 4s812022 In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deservei to be allowed against the defendant no.3.

ORDER

1) I hereby allow this T.A. of the Applicant Bank and direct the defendant no. 3 to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs.1,57,49,818/- along with cost, expenses and interest @08.650lo from the date of filing of this O.A. which has become T'A till the date of realization'

2) In case of failure to deposit the above amount within the stipulated period, the same shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged properties i'e',

(i) . Unit no.1706, Tower-2A, Speedway Avenue, Jaypee Greens SporG City, GNIDA, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh and (ii). Unit no. P-1806, 18s Floor, Tower-2A, Speedway Avenue, Jaypee Greens Sports City, GNIDA, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh' In case of short fall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of personal movable and immovable assets of the defendant no' 3

3) Recovery Certificate be issued fofthwith and be sent to Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il' Delhi.

4) The registry of this Tribunal is hereby directed to issue free copy of the order and send the same to both the parties. $.

TANO. 458/2022

5) Parties are direct to appear before the Ld. Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on 26.L0.2026. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to records. Date :25.08.2026 sA (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGD PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi This judgement has been signed, dated and pronounced in open court. Date : 25.08.2026 E.\ (susHIL KUMAR RAsroGr) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi