Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Joginder Singh

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/1267/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application by State Bank of India against Joginder Singh for recovery of Rs. 28,78,361 as a loan became NPA. Director permitted claim alongside costs and adjusted interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,78,361 with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a.; issue of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce sale of mortgaged/personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Joginder Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1267/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.09.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Centre at State Bank Bhawan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having one of its Local Head Office at Scetor-17 Chandigarh, including one such branch at Jakhewal, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab through its branch Manager, Sh. Mann Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Joginder Singh S/o Sh. Gurcharan Singh R/o House No.148, Village Jakhepal Baas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab.

¶9

………. Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for the applicant (through

¶12

VC)

¶13

Defendant already ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.28,78,361.00p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Three Hundred Sixty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mann Singh, Branch Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notifications dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 under Regulation no. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India General Regulation framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section 3 of Section 50 of State Bank of India Act, 1955, with previous sanction of Central Government.

¶16

¶17

OA NO.1267/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIAVS SH. JOGINDER SINGH

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.9.00 Lacs & Term Loan (KGC) of Rs.8.00 Lacs, vide Loan applications dated 30.08.2013, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.9.00 Lacs & Term Loan (KGC) of Rs.8.00 Lacs vide Letter of arrangements dated 11.09.2013, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 40K-00M situated at Village Jakhepal Baas, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing vasika no.1795 dated 09.09.2013 , along with its translations, which are Annexures A8 & A8A to this OA; Mutation sanction letter dated 09.09.2013, along with its translations, which are Annexure A9 & A9A to this OA. Documents executed: - Gazette notification dated 20.03.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation agreements, both dated 11.09.2013, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.07.2020, along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Statement of Account, along with account closure enquiry, which are Annexures A11 to A14 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.28,78,361.00p, which is recoverable and the defendant were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 27.03.2024.

¶19

¶20

OA NO.1267/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIAVS SH. JOGINDER SINGH

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mann Singh, Branch Manager, State Bank of India h as been filed.

¶22

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶23

It was argued by learned counsel through video conferencing 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 A14 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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 loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendant were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.28,78,361.00p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Three Hundred Sixty One Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @13.80%p.a. in both accounts with half yearly rests from 21.06.2022 till the realization.

¶25

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, 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 Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in

¶26

¶27

OA NO.1267/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIAVS SH. JOGINDER SINGH

¶28

both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.28,78,361.00p (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Eight Thousand Three Hundred Sixty One Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts 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/mortgaged properties 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.

¶30

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 15.10.2025 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.

¶31

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 23.09.2025.

¶32

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶33

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Joginder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Joginder 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

State Bank of India versus M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Resham Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Neeru Khosla

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Ravideep Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Beant Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjind Singh