Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anil Kumar

DRT6 Feb 2024OA/113/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an application filed by SBI under Section 19 of the RDB Act for the recovery of Rs. 28,11,227.80 with interest from the respondent. The debtor failed to appear, and the court enforced the recovery based on proven loan documents.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,11,227.80 with interest at 7.50% per annum from the date of application until payment, recoverable via sale of mortgaged property and other assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Anil Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 113 of 2022 Date of Institution: 10.01.2022 Date of Decision: 06.02.2024

¶4

SBI, Sector 17, Chandigarh and having its branch amongst other places at RASMECCC, Rail Head Complex, Jammu. (J & K). and one of the specialized branch known as Stressed Assets Resolution Brnach (SARB), at Rail Head Complex, Administrative Building, Bahu Plaza, Jammu. 180012 (J & K)

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Kulshashi Parkash, R/o House No.48, Lane No.1, Ekta Vihar, Gangyal, Jammu. 180010 (J & K)

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Sh. Vivek Verma, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- Ex parte.

¶10

OA for the Recovery of Rs.28,11,227.80p with interest @7.50% per annum with monthly rests from 10.01.2022.

¶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.28,11,227.80p with interest against Sh. Anil Kumar (defendant).

¶13

Bank’s case is that on 29.03.2018, it had granted Rs.20.00 lacs as Housing Loan/Term Loan and Rs.1.55 lacs as funding of Home Loan Insurance Cover (SBI Suraksha), totaling Rs.21.55 lacs, to defendant. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property (fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @8.15% per annum with monthly rests. On 09.01.2022, a sum of Rs.28,11,227.80p was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶14

¶15

3. On 31.03.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered
post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in
appearance.Vide_order dated 16.11.2022, he was proceeded_ex parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Sourabh Bakshi, Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-14.
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.21.55 lacs and on 09.01.2022, a sum of Rs.28,11,227.80p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.28,11,227.80p (Rupees Twenty-Eight Lacs Eleven Thousand Two
Hundred Twenty-Seven And Paisa Eighty Only) with interest @7.50% per annum with monthly rests from 10.01.2022, 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.3(A) of the application, as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
06.03.2024, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgage property, 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: 06.02.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anil Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anil Kumar

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

Bushara Aseez versus Authorised Officer South Indian Bank

Aseena versus Urban Co. operative Bnak Ltd.

Indian Bank versus Ms Shree Hari Fuels

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Rakesh Kumar

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Mohammad Reja Alam

State Bank of India versus Niduram Hanmaiah