Allowed

State Bank of India v. Jaimas Masih

DRT6 Oct 2025OA/1797/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-1, Chandigarh allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 26.42 lakhs plus interest against two defendants who mortgaged land for an agricultural loan. The bank proved its case via affidavit and documents; the court directed issuance of a recovery certificate and sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 26,42,515/- with interest @10.60% p.a. allowed; recovery certificate issued; sale of mortgaged land directed.

State Bank of India versus Jaimas Masih — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1797/2022 Date of Institution: 29.08.2022 Date of Decision: 06.10.2025

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Nakodar, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Jaimas Masih s/o Sh. Hajara, r/o Village Kaimwala, P.O. Kot Badal Khan, Tehsil Nakodar, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶8

Iqbal Masih s/o Sh. Jaimas Masih, r/o Village Kaimwala, P.O. Kot Badal Khan, Tehsil Nakodar, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Sumeet Sehgal proxy counsel for Sh. SK Arora, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 14.05.2024 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.26,42,515/- with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 29.08.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.26,42,515/- with interest against Sh. Jaimas Masih and another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 05.03.2016, it had granted a loan of Rs.24.00 Lacs to defendants in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant no.1 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. Defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 04.09.2018 & 08.02.2021. On 11.08.2022, a sum of Rs.26,42,515/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

¶18

On 14.11.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 14.05.2024, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Rajesh Kohli, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11. 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.24.00 Lacs and on 11.08.2022, a sum of Rs.26,42,515/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.26,42,515/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Forty Two Thousand Five Hundred Fifteen Only) with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 29.08.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both 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 07.11.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20AB) 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: 06.10.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶19

MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Jaimas Masih

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Jaimas Masih

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 National Bank versus Sukhwant Kaur

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Gurpreet Singh

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Surjit Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Sukhwant Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Sanjeev Kumar Gupta

Icici Bank Limited versus Surender