Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh Jatinder Singh

DRT14 Aug 2024OA/1013/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for the recovery of Rs. 29,24,595/- with interest, ordering the issuance of a Recovery Certificate and directing the Recovery Officer to distribute sale proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 29,24,595/- with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Recovery Officer directed to distribute sale proceeds.

State Bank of India versus Sh Jatinder Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1013 of 2022 Date of Institution: 11.05.2022 Date of Decision: 14.08.2024

¶4

SBI, Village Bara Pind, Tehsil Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Jatinder Singh S/o Sh. Sohan Singh, R/o Village Johal, PO Bara Pind, Tehsil Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Ms. Puja Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- Ex parte.

¶10

OA for the Recovery of Rs.29,24,595/- with interest @10.25% per annum with half yearly rests from 07.05.2022.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

SBI (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.29,24,595/- with interest against Sh. Jatinder Singh (defendant).

¶13

Bank’s case is that on 13.03.2015, it had granted Agricultural KCC loan of Rs.20.00 lacs to defendant for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.25% per annum with half yearly rests. On 07.05.2022, a sum of Rs.29,24,595/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application. 3. On 10.06.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 09.01.2023, he was proceeded ex parte .

¶14

¶15

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Harish Kumar, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-15. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.20.00 lacs and on 07.05.2022, a sum of Rs.29,24,595/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.29,24,595/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs Twenty Four Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Five Only) with interest @10.25% per annum with half yearly rests from 07.05.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property, fully detailed in para No.3A of the application, as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 16.09.2024 , who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 14.08.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh Jatinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh Jatinder Singh

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

Rupesh Jamnadas Amdawadi versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Canara Bank versus M/s Viashali Dairy Products and Others

Vikram Kumar versus Indian Bank

Indian Bank versus Sri Sandip Kumar Chakraborty Co. Borrower of Ms Shivam Inn And Ors.

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Ultrasketch Private Limited and Anr.

Damjibhai Bavabhai Sonagara versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited