Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manpreet Singh

DRT6 Nov 2025OA/1121/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of dues. The respondent was absent. The court declared the respondent liable to pay the outstanding loan amount with interest and ordered issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; applicant entitled to recover Rs. 22,27,584.00 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from hypothecated vehicle or personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Manpreet Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1121/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 29.07.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.11.2025 State Bank of India, a body Corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Central Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having one of its Local Head Offices at Sector 17, Chandigarh having branches at different places and one of its AMCC Branch at Tarn Taran, District. Tarn Taran, Punjab through its Chief Manager Shri. Nand Kishore Prasad.

¶6

……..Applicant Versus Sh. Manpreet Singh Son of Sh. Gurvel Singh R/o Village Mirpur, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran (Punjab) -143301. ……. Defendant Advocates: Argued by Sh. Aseem Kataria, Advocate for the applicant Defendant already ex-parte FINAL ORDER 1. Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.22,27,584.00p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Shri. Nand Kishore Prasad, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in the terms of the Gazette Notification published in the Gazette of India 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 27.03.1987 under Regulation No. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India Regulations framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (3) of Section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 with the previous sanction of the Central

¶7

2 OA/1121/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANPREET SINGH

¶8

Government. Gazette Notification dated 27.03.1987, is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶9

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of Term loan of Rs.24.00 Lacs for purchase of Combine Harvester vide loan application 01.09.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned Term loan of Rs.24.00 Lacs for purchase of Combine Harvester vide Letter of arrangement dated 11.09.2023, whichis AnnexureA3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶10

Defendant had hypothecated Combine Harvester Make : Dasmesh Mechanical Works Pvt. Ltd. Model : Dasmesh 9100 Plasma Plus bearing registration no. PB46AJ9409, Chassis No.DM910012023109 & Engine No.PFHM116721 vide Hypothecation agreement dated 11.09.2023 which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Registration Certificate of Vehicle is Annexure A5 to this OA; Registration Certificate of Vehicle is Annexure A5 to this OA; Insurance Policy of Vehicle is Annexure A6 to this OA; Invoice and Sale Certificate dated 16.09.2023, which are Annexures A7 and A8 to this OA.

¶11

Documents executed: - Demand Notice dated 22.01.2025 u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A10 to this OA.

¶12

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.22,27,584.00p, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶13

3 OA/1121/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANPREET SINGH

¶14

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 30.10.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Shri. Nand Kishore Prasad, Chief Manager , State Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.22,27,584.00p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.60%p.a. with 2% penal interest with monthly rests 29.07.2025 from till the realization. The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this

¶15

4 OA/1121/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANPREET SINGH

¶16

Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶17

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.22,27,584.00p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated vehicle of the defendant in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 18.11.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 06.11.2025.

¶18

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manpreet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manpreet 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

Axis Bank Limited versus Late Sh. Gurnam Singh through His Legal Heirs and Others

Bank of India versus Sh. Joginder Singh and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Smt. Manjit Kaur and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Khalsa Agriculture Store and Others

Union Bank of India versus M/s Saptal Cater and Decorator and another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Swaran Singh