Allowed

State Bank of India v. Rajinder Singh

DRT14 Jul 2025OA/150/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 22.18 lacs plus interest, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable. A recovery certificate is to be issued and payment distributed by the Recovery Officer from mortgaged land proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,18,307.71 with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued for distribution of sale proceeds.

State Bank of India versus Rajinder Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 150/2022 Date of Institution: 17.01.2022 Date of Decision: 14.07.2025

¶4

SBI (erstwhile SBOP) having its branches all over India and a branch at V.P.O. Kandrori, Tehsil Indora, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. ……..Applicant

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Rajinder Singh s/o Late Sh. Dharam Singh

¶7

Amit Samkaria s/o Rajinder Singh both r/o V.P.O. Bhapoo, Tehsil Indora, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

¶8

Mohinder Singh s/o Dharam Singh, r/o V.P.O. Bhapoo, Tehsil Indora, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Gurinderjit Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants- ex parte vide order dated 16.02.2023 .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,18,307.71p with interest @10.25% per annum with monthly rests from 17.01.2022. 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.22,18,307.71p with interest against Rajinder Singh and others (defendants).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 15.05.2014, it had granted a Term Loan of Rs.20.00 Lacs to defendant Nos. 1 and 2 for housing purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had mortgaged their land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.3 stood as guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @10.25% per annum with monthly rests. On 04.01.2022, a sum of Rs.22,18,307.71p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

¶16

3. On 29.03.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 16.02.2023, they were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Sh. Suresh Kumar, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-25.
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 04.01.2022, a sum of Rs.22,18,307.71p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.22,18,307.71p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Eighteen Thousand Three
Hundred Seven and Paise Seventy One Only) with interest @10.25% per annum with monthly rests from 17.01.2022, till the date of payment is
hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all 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
20.08.2025,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgaged land 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: 14.07.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Rajinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Rajinder 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 Ishu

Icici Bank Limited versus Dalbir

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Ms Arbaz Fruit Company

Punjab National Bank versus Manjit Singh

Sri Anurag Das Prop of Ms Suparna Industries and Anr. versus Punjab National Bank

Federal Bank versus Hilari Jose Alias Saji Joseph Alias Hilari Joseph