Allowed

State Bank of India v. Veer Sukhwant Singh

DRT22 Oct 2025OA/1663/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs. 21,83,317/- with interest. The court held evidence proved the loan advancement and due amount, permitting recovery via sale of mortgaged land and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs. 21,83,317/- with interest via sale of mortgaged land and personal property of the defendant.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1663/2022 Date of Institution: 12.08.2022 Date of Decision: 22.10.2025

¶4

SBI, having its branches all over India and a branch at Sadiq Distt. Faridkot, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Veer Sukhwant Singh s/o Sh. Resham Singh, r/o Village Buttar, Tehsil & Distt. Faridkot, Punjab. ……….Defendant Advocates Mr. Iqbal Mohammad, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 15.05.2023 . OA for the Recovery of Rs.21,83,317/- with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.08.2022.

¶7

ORDER 1. 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.21,83,317/- with interest against Veer Sukhwant Singh (defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 03.08.2015, it had granted a loan of Rs.15.00 Lacs 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 @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 27.07.2018 & 28.06.2019. On 07.06.2022, a sum of Rs.21,83,317/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶8

¶9

On 30.08.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 15.05.2023, he was proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Jitandra Pal Singh, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-10. 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.15.00 Lacs and on 07.06.2022, a sum of Rs.21,83,317/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.21,83,317/- (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Eighty Three Thousand Three Hundred Seventeen Only) with interest @10.60% per annum with halfyearly rests from 12.08.2022, 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. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 24.11.2025, 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. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 22.10.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Veer Sukhwant Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Veer Sukhwant 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

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Smiriti Maharishi Sarin and Ors.

Canara Bank versus Vishwanath Hj

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Gangamma Batra

Simarjit Singh versus State Bank of India

Om Sai Trading Co. through its proprietor Anju Bansal versus State Bank of India

Federal Bank versus Aliyar