Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sarup Singh

DRT19 Dec 2025OA/1422/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed a recovery application filed by SBI against two defendants for the outstanding amount of Rs. 26,75,199/- with interest arising from a guaranteed KCCL agricultural loan, mandating the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed for recovery of Rs. 26,75,199/- with interest; recovery certificate issued to sale mortgaged property and distribute proceeds.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1422/2022 Date of Institution: 18.07.2022 Date of Decision: 19.12.2025

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Agriculture Development Branch, Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sarup Singh s/o Sh. Gurbachan Singh, r/o Village Odhra, Post Office Jalota, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshairpur, Punjab.

¶8

Baljinder Singh s/o Sh. Sarup Singh, r/o Village Odhra, Post Office Jalota, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Jatinder Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 08.04.2024 . OA for the Recovery of Rs.26,75,199/- with interest @10.25% per annum with half-yearly rests from 18.07.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.26,75,199/- with interest against Sh. Sarup Singh and another (defendants).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 10.10.2018, it had granted a loan of Rs.20.00 Lacs to defendants in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.25% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 31.07.2021, a sum of Rs.26,75,199/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

¶16

3. On 30.08.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 08.04.2024, they were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Sh. Devinder Singh, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-5.
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.20.00Lacs and on 31.07.2021, a sum of Rs.26,75,199/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.26,75,199/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Seventy Five Thousand One Hundred Ninety Nine Only) with interest @10.25% per annum with half- yearly rests from 18.07.2022, 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 land 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
23.01.2026,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgaged land 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: 19.12.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Sarup Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sarup 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

Hdfc Bank versus Dinesh Manchanda

Central Bank of India versus M/S Kanha Trilogy

Icici Bank Limited versus Gulab Chand

Ashwin Bhagwatrao Gawalikar versus Dcb Bank Limited

Sham Lal Goyal versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus Teja Singh