Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ujal Didar Singh

DRT27 Jan 2025OA/1449/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by SBI for the recovery of Rs.22,20,760 with interest against a defaulting borrower. The court confirmed the loan advance and due amount based on bank evidence and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate for the sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.22,20,760/- with interest allowed; direction to issue Recovery Certificate and order appearance before Recovery Officer.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1449 of 2022 Date of Institution: 11.07.2022 Date of Decision: 27.01.2025

¶4

SBI, one of its branch at VPO Chitti, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Ujal Didar Singh s/o Sh. Kuldeep Singh r/o B14/79, Near Jallowkhana Shalimar Garden, Tehsil & District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Ms. Naveeta, proxy Counsel for Sh. RK Jindal, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶10

Defendant – ex parte

¶11

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,20,760/- with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 11.07.2022.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

SBI, (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.22,20,760/- with interest against Sh. Ujal Didar Singh.

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 12.08.2016, it had granted a KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs to Defendant for agriculture purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 08.07.2022, a sum of Rs.22,20,760/was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

¶16

3. On 06.09.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered
post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in
appearance. Vide order dated 14.11.2023, he was proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-9.
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.20.00 Lacs and on 08.07.2022, a sum of Rs.22,20,760/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.22,20,760/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Only) with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 11.07.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with
costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property fully
detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
28.02.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgaged property 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 party.
Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated:27.01.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ujal Didar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ujal Didar 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

Smt Aarti Wo Mahendrakumar Meshram versus Yavatmal Urban Co-Operative Bank

Shri Jayvanth Tarachand Thool versus Shriram Finance Limited

Veerbhadra Trading Co. Prop Nikit Prakash Dalal versus Bank of India

ms a P Miles Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus M/s Gopal Tours and Travels and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Anil Kumar Singh and others