Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jagdev Singh

DRT18 Sept 2025OA/1439/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India to recover loans of Rs. 35.33 Lakhs. The Tribunal reduced the claimed interest to a uniform 8% simple interest per annum and directed issuance of recovery certificate, permitting sale proceeds or attachment of assets for payment.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 35.33 Lakhs plus uniform 8% simple interest p.a. from filing of OA until realization via sale of mortgaged property or attachment of assets. Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jagdev Singh — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1439/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 18.09.2025

¶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, 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

Sh. Jagdev Singh S/o Sh. Jora Singh R/o House No.152, Ward No.3, Village Ghagga, Tehsil Patran, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶10

……. Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Rishab Gupta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for Applicant (through 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 and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.35,33,307.00p (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Thirty Three Thousand Three Hundred Seven 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 in terms of Gazette Notification published in the Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 under Regulation Nos. 76 read with 77 of State Bank of India General Regulation 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 Government.

¶16

2 OA NO. 1439/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. JAGDEV SINGH

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.8.80 Lacs, Agri. Term Loan of Rs.6.00 Lacs under KGC/ATL scheme and a Loan of Rs.1.00 Lac for Debt Swap vide Loan Application (KCC), Loan Application (KGC) and Loan Application (Debt Swap) dated 15.09.2014, which are Annexures A2 to A4 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.8.80 Lacs, Agri. Term Loan of Rs.6.00 Lacs under KGC/ATL scheme and a Loan of Rs.1.00 Lac for Debt Swap vide Letter of Arrangement (KCC), Letter of Arrangement (KGC) and Letter of Arrangement (Debt Swap), all dated 22.09.2014, which are Annexures A5 to A7 to this OA. 4. Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. Land Measuring 16K-00M situated at Village Ghagga, Tehsil Patran, District Patiala, Punjab vide Declaration dated 26.09.2014 u/s 4(1) of the Punjab Agriculture Credit Operation & Miscellaneous Provision (Banks) Act, 194 8, along with its Translation, w hich are Annexures A11 & A11A to this OA and Mutation Sanction vide rapat dated 26.09.2014, along with its Translation, to this OA. Documents executed :- Gazette Notification dated 20.03.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement (KCC), Hypothecation Agreement (KGC) & Hypothecation Agreement (Debt Swap) all dated 01.10.2014, which are Annexures A8 to A10 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.01.2018, along with postal receipt, which is Annexure A12 to this OA and Statements of Accounts along with account closure enquiries, which are Annexures A13 to A18 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 adebit of Rs.35,33,307.00p, 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.

¶18

3 OA NO. 1439/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. JAGDEV SINGH

¶19

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 25.04.2024.

¶20

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sandeep Kumar Bajaj, Chief Manager, State Bank of India, h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶21

It was argued by learned Proxy 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 A18 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 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.35,33,307.00p (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Thirty Three Thousand Three Hundred Seven Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.75%p.a. in KCC, @14.20% p.a. in KGC/ATL and @12.00% p.a. in Debt Swap, plus penal interest @2% p.a. in all the loan accounts, with half yearly rests from 24.06.2022 till the realization.

¶22

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 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 @08.00%p.a. in

¶23

4 OA NO. 1439/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. JAGDEV SINGH

¶24

all 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.35,33,307.00p (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Thirty Three Thousand Three Hundred Seven Only), with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all 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.

¶25

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶26

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 09.10.2025. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶27

Dated: 18.09.2025

¶28

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

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jagdev Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jagdev 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

Bank of India versus Sh. Gursant Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Vinod Kumar Chawla and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Kashmir Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Pal Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Manpreet Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Harjit Singh and Another