PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK (UNITED BANK OF INDIA) vs BABLU KUMAR PANDEY & ANR. on 19 October 2026

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank, on 27.tL.20L9 through P.K. Varshney, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.21,56,425.03 together with cost, charges and pendentellite and future interest @8.600lo 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 nos.1 and 2, the applicant bank sanctioned a United Housing Loan Scheme of Rs.20,00,000/-, vide sanction letter dated 27.1L.20L5. The defendants executed all necessary.- lo_aning documents on cl , TANO. 1680of2023 z

27. tt.2015. Further more security in the form of an equitable mortgage of an immovable residential flat owned by the defendant no.l, having address House Property No.M-120, Flat No.1* Floor-3, Sec_12, pratap Vihar, Ghaziabad, U.p-201003 was furnished as primary security towards the said loan extended by the applicant bank.

3. It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facilities, 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. Hence, the account was classified as NPA. Thus, the present O.A.[I.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 service. Accordingly, the defendants were proceeded against exparte on 20.0L.2023.

5. The applicant bank has filed evidence by way of affidavit of Shri. P.K. Varnshey, Chief Manager of the applicant bank as Annexure A to Annexure v, which have gone unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, the case of the applicant stands fully established against the defendants with respect to nonpayment of outstanding amount.

6. After perusing the records, this Tribunal is of the view that the applicant Oa1!$r proved its case beyond ril\

TANO. 1680of2023 3 reasonable doubts. The evidence and documents filed by the applicant bank not rebutted by the defendants by not placing any evidence and there is no question of disbelieving the evidence and documents filed 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.l and 2 to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank within 30 days from today, a sum of Rs.21,56,426.03 along with cost, expenses and interest @8.600/o from the date of flling 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 personal movable and immovable assets of the defendant nos.1 and 2.

3) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith 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. 9,\'

TANO. 1680of2023 4

5) Parties are directed to appear before the Ld. Recovery Officer, DRT-II, Delhi on 2L.12.2026. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. File be consigned to records. Date : 19.10.2026 :cl\ -/' . r<'r i (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT.II, DCIhi This judgement has been signed, dated and pronounced in open court. _ - -----+rr^ Date : 19.10.2026 s.l . -_.iir*rj: .. (susHrL KUiEAR RAStoGl) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi (