Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh and Another

DRT18 Jul 2025OA/1428/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of outstanding dues of Rs. 25,18,702 against two borrowers who defaulted on secured loans. The Tribunal ordered joint and several liability and granted uniform simple interest at 8% per annum from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 25,18,702 plus costs and simple interest at 8% per annum from the date of filing; issue of Recovery Certificate.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1428/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 08.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 18.07.2025.

¶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, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point Mumbai and having one of its Local Head Office at Sector-17, Chandigarh including one such Branch at Samana (ADB) District Patiala through its Chief Manager Sh. Sandeep Kumar Bajaj.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh S/o Sh. Kartar Singh R/o VPO Rajla, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala.

¶10

Jagjit Singh S/o Sh. Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh R/o VPO Rajla, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by, Sh. Rishab Gupta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gaurav Singla, advocate for Applicant

¶14

Defendants are already ex parte.

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.25,18,702.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Eighteen Thousand Seven Hundred Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sandeep Kumar Bajaj, Chief manager, o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Gazette notification published in Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 Under Regulations no.76 & 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations framed in exercising of the powers conferred by Sub section 3 of

¶17

2 OA/1428/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BHAJAN SINGH @ HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶18

section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.6.00 Lacs & KGC/Agri Term Loan of Rs.6.75 Lacs (Total facilities of Rs.12.75 Lacs) vide Loan applications dated 26.08.2013 and 27.08.2013 along with their translations which are Annexures A2 to A3-A to this OA.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.6.00 Lacs & KGC/ Agri Term Loan of Rs.6.75 Lacs (Total facilities of Rs.12.75Lacs) vide Letter of arrangements dated 27.08.2013, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 32K-00M situated at Village Rajla, Tehsil Samana, district Patiala Punjab vide Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing vasika no.1353 dated 30.08.2013, along with its translations, which is Annexure A8 & A8-A to this OA; Mutation sanction letter dated 02.09.2013, along with its translation, which are Annexures A9 & A9-A to this OA. Documents executed: Gazette Notification dated 20.03.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreements dated 03.09.2013, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA; Legal notice dated 17.06.2022 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Statement of accounts along with account closure enquiry, along with certificate regarding computer system, 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.25,18,702.00p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding

¶22

3 OA/1428/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BHAJAN SINGH @ HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶23

amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 20.03.2024.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sandeep Kumar Bajaj, Chief manager, State Bank of India, h as been filed.

¶26

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶27

It was argued by learned Proxy 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 A14 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.25,18,702.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Eighteen Thousand Seven Hundred Two only) rest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. plus 2%p.a. penal interest in KCC & [email protected]%p.a. plus 2%p.a. penal interest in KGC/ATL, with half yearly rests from 24.06.2022 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, undertaking

¶28

4 OA/1428/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BHAJAN SINGH @ HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶29

of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 @8.00%p.a. in 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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,18,702.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Eighteen Thousand Seven Hundred Two only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in 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 mortgaged property of the defendants 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 defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 25.08.2025.

¶34

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 18.07.2025.

¶37

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

State Bank of India v. Sh. Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Bhajan Singh @ Harbhajan Singh and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Deepak Inder Singh and Another

Indian Bank versus M/S Rudra International and Others

State Bank of India versus Messrs Bharat Seed Corporation and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Hardial Singh and Another

Central Bank of India versus M/S Chauhan Departmental Store and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jangdip Singh