Allowed

State Bank of India v. Rajesh Kumar Bhopal

DRT29 Jul 2025OA/380/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed SBI's application for recovery of a housing loan principal and interest against two defendants who failed to appear. The court validated the bank's evidence of the loan and due amount, ordered joint and several liability, and directed issuance of a recovery certificate for sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.48,59,280 with interest; issuance of Recovery Certificate; direction to sell mortgaged land.

State Bank of India versus Rajesh Kumar Bhopal — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 380/2022 Date of Institution: 21.02.2022 Date of Decision: 29.07.2025

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at VPO Bhuntar, Tehsil Bhuntar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Bhopal s/o Sh. Sohan Lal Bhopal C/o Bhopal Cloth House, Main Bazar Bhuntar, Tehsil Bhuntar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.

¶8

Sh. Sohan Lal Bhopal s/o Chint Ram C/o Bhopal Cloth House, Main Bazar Bhuntar, Tehsil Bhuntar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Sanjeev K. Arora, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.48,59,280/- with interest @12.80% per annum with monthly rests from 21.02.2022. ORDER

¶13

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.48,59,280/- with interest against Sh. Rajesh Kumar Bhopal and another (defendants).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 06.02.2016, it had granted a loan of Rs.42,84,400/- to defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the form of Housing Loan. 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 @12.80% per annum with monthly rests. The defendants had duly acknowledged their liability towards the debt on 02.02.2019 and 01.02.2022. On 08.02.2022, a sum of Rs.48,59,280/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

¶16

On 15.03.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 19.04.2024, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Rohilla, Chief 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.42,84,400/- and on 08.02.2022, a sum of Rs.48,59,280/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.48,59,280/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Fifty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Only) with interest @12.80% per annum with monthly rests from 21.02.2022, 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 04.09.2025, 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: 29.07.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh Manoj Kalra

State Bank of India v. Rajesh Kumar Bhopal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Rajesh Kumar Bhopal

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 Mohd.Aarif

Punjab National Bank versus Sanjeev Kumar

Idbi Bank versus Dilpreet Singh

Mr Smirithy Sourab Shyamal And Anr. versus Idfc First Bank Ltd.

Shahar Abdul Jabbar versus South Indian Bank

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Ganpati Ji Mini Rice Mill and others