Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House

DRT30 Jul 2025OA/1004/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of Rs. 22,94,903/- with interest from the defendants. The Tribunal found that the bank advanced loans secured by property and issued a Recovery Certificate, directing the Recovery Officer to sell mortgaged assets to satisfy the debt.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,94,903/- with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Recovery Officer directed to sell assets and distribute proceeds.

State Bank of India versus M/S Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1004/2022 Date of Institution: 17.05.2022 Date of Decision: 30.07.2025

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Bhagta Bhai Ka, Distt. Bathinda, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

M/s Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House, Near Water Works, Village & Post Office Siryewala, Tehsil and Distt. Bathinda, Punjab, through its proprietor Sh. Balbir Singh.

¶8

Balbir Singh s/o Sh. Sadhu Singh, r/o Village & Post office Siryewala, Tehsil and Distt. Bathinda, Punjab, proprietor of M/s Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Bir Singh proxy counsel for Sh. Anil Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 21.02.2023 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,94,903/- with interest @11.55% per annum with monthly rests from 17.05.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.22,94,903/- with interest against M/s Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House and others (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 13.08.2018, it had granted a Term Loan of Rs.2.00 Lacs and a C.C. Limit of Rs.11.00 Lacs to defendant No.1 through its proprietor i.e. defendant No.2 for Business purpose. To secure the loans, Defendant No.2 had mortgaged his property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loans were chargeable to interest @11.55%

¶17

¶18

per annum with monthly rests. On 27.04.2022, a sum of Rs.22,94,903/was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

3. On 16.06.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 21.02.2023, they were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Sh. Sunil Kumar, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-7.
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 total loan
of Rs.13.00 Lacs (Rs.2.00 Lacs in Term Loan and Rs.11.00 Lacs in C.C. Limit) and on 27.04.2022, a sum of Rs.22,94,903/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.22,94,903/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Ninety Four Thousand Nine Hundred Three Only) with interest @11.55% per annum with monthly rests from 17.05.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. 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
08.09.2025,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property and hypothecated stocks, book-debts and assets as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.

¶20

¶21

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: 30.07.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. M/S Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Bhai Roop Chand Furniture House

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

State Bank of India versus M/S Anshu Man Enterprises

Punjab National Bank versus M/S I.S Construction

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Mariyama Bano

Ms Krm Tyres versus State Bank of India

Asma Beevi versus South Indian Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Maniruddin and Anr.