Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mandeep Singh

DRT11 Dec 2025OA/153/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed SBI's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs. 35,37,499/- with interest against the defendant. The court found the loan advanced and due, permitting recovery via sale of mortgaged land and personal property, and directed appearance of parties before the Recovery Officer.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 35,37,499/- with interest @11.95% p.a. allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; parties to appear before Recovery Officer.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 153/2023 Date of Institution: 26.12.2022 Date of Decision: 11.12.2025

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at SARB, Plot No.311, 4^th Floor, Aman Plaza, Lajpat Nagar, Ambedkar Chowk, Aman Plaza, Jalandhar, Punjab. ……..Applicant Vs. Mandeep Singh s/o Sh. Baldev Singh, r/o Village and Post Office Aharana Kalan, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab.

¶5

……….Defendant

¶6

Advocates Sh. Nagresh Bagdi, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 05.09.2024 . OA for the Recovery of Rs.35,37,499/- with interest @11.95% per annum with half-yearly rests from 26.12.2022.

¶7

ORDER 1. SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.35,37,499/- with interest against Sh. Mandeep Singh (defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 23.05.2015, it had enhanced existing limit from Rs.10.00Lacs to Rs.40.00Lacs to defendant in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.95% per annum with half-yearly rests. The defendant had acknowledged the liability towards the debt on 06.01.2021. On 12.10.2022, a sum of Rs.35,37,499/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶8

¶9

On 03.02.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 05.09.2024, he was proceeded ex parte .

¶10

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Manjit Mahey, Chief Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-13. 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.40.00Lacs and on 12.10.2022, a sum of Rs.35,37,499/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.35,37,499/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Nine Only) with interest @11.95% per annum with halfyearly rests from 26.12.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. 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 defendant.

¶11

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 16.01.2026, 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 party.

¶12

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 11.12.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Mandeep Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mandeep 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

Jalaludheen U K versus South Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Ramandeep Singh

Darshna Devi versus PNB Housing Finance Limited

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sukhwinder Singh

Indian Overseas Bank versus Smt Neha Rana

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Piara Singh