Allowed

State Bank of India v. Shri Manjit Singh

DRT12 Mar 2025OA/2136/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the SBI's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs. 24,84,775/- with interest against the defendant, who failed to appear. The court directed recovery via sale of mortgaged land and other properties and issued a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.24,84,775/- with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Defendant directed to appear before Recovery Officer.

State Bank of India versus Shri Manjit Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2136/2022 Date of Institution: 31.10.2022 Date of Decision: 12.03.2025

¶4

SBI, having its branches all over India and a branch at Guru Ki NagriMandi Gobindgarh, District Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Manjit Singh s/o Sh. Sulakhan Singh, r/o Village Fatehpur, PO Mullanpur Kalan, District Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates Ms. Lovedeep Kaur, proxy Counsel for Ms. Puja Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte . OA for the Recovery of Rs.24,84,775/- with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 31.10.2022.

¶10

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.24,84,775/- with interest against Sh. Manjit Singh (defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 23.05.2016, it had granted a loan of Rs.18.00 Lacs to defendant 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. On 16.09.2022, a sum of Rs.24,84,775/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶11

2 3. On 06.12.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered
post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in
appearance. Vide order dated 15.02.2024, he was proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Ms. Anju Nagpal, Chief Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-12 (A-3).
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.18.00 Lacs and on 16.09.2022, a sum of Rs.24,84,775/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.24,84,775/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Eighty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Five Only) with interest @10.60% per annum with half- yearly rests from 31.10.2022, 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 on09.04.2025,
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: 12.03.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Shri Manjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Shri Manjit 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

Rathi Agencies versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Mangal Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Dalbir Singh (Since Deceased through Lrs)

Beena versus Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Sarju Shamsudeen versus Catholic Syrian Bank Limited

Mr S Padmanabha Rao and Other versus Sir M Visvesvaraya Co. Operative Bank Ltd.