PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK vs SHRI YASHPAL SINGHLA on 2 September 2026

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 27.08.2020 through Mr' Navin Kumar' Authorized Representative/Principal Officer of the applicant bank, under Section 19 of ttie RDB Act' 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,81,29,385.67 together with cost, charges and pendentellite and future interest @13'75olo p'a' 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 defendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned a Housing Loan Facility of Rs.1,54,00,000/- for purchase of house EM property Flat No' G-02, Type-04' Tower-B Antriksh Green Apaftment, Plot No' F-007' Sector-50 Noida (UP). fne defeng{nt lo'1 executed all necessary (A

TANO. 1034of2024 2 loaning documents on 21'04'2018' To secure the above-mentioned facility extended to defendant no'1' defendant no.1 created moftgage aforesaid property in favour of aPPlicant bank'

3. It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facilities, but failed to maintain the financial discipline and faited 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' Hence' the account was classified as NPA dated 30'09'2018' The applicant bank served a demand notice datd 15'10'2018 to the defendants but failed to recover the same Thus' the present O.A.ff'A' is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues.

4. On notice by this Tribunal' defendants failed to put appearance at all, despite publicaUon' Accordingly' the defendants were 03.02.2026. amount. proceeded against exParte on

5. The applicant bank has filed evidence by way of affidavitofSh.NavinKumar,Authorizedofficerofthe applicant bank as Annexure A-1 to Annexure A-25' which have gone unchallenged and un-rebufted' Hence' the case of the applicant stands fully established against the defendantswithrespecttononpaymentofoutstanding

6. After perusing the records' this Tribunal is of the view that the applicant bank has proved its case beyond 9A

TANO. 1034 of 2024 3 reasonable doubts. The evidence and documents filed by the applicant bank not rebufted by the defendants by not placing any evidence and there is no question of disbelieving the evidence and documents flled by the applicant bank based upon the written/printed documents. In the light of the above discussions, the present T'A' deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

1) I hereby allow this T'A' of the applicant bank and direct the defendant nos'1 and 2 to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank within 30 days from today' a sum of Rs.1,81,29,385'67 along with cost' expenses and interest @8.600/o 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 propeflry bearing Flat No' G- 02, Type-04, Tower-B Antriksh Green Apartments' Plot No. F-007, Sector-50 Noida (UP)' In case of short hll' the same shall be recovered from the sale of personal movable and immovable assets of the defendant nos'l and 2.

3) Recovery Certiflcate 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. 1034of2024 4

5) Parties are directed to appear before the Ld' Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on O2'lL'2026' Pending IAs, if anY, stand disPosed of' File be consigned to records' -.=- Date : 02.09.2026 SA (susHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT.II, DCIhi This judgement has been signed' dated and pronounced in oPen court' Date : 02.09.2026 E} (SUSHIL KUMAR I{ASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi -_--..-\.-...--\