Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sharanjit Singh

DRT24 Jul 2025OA/390/2022

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. 27,60,047.30 with interest from the mortgagor and guarantor, proceeded ex parte, and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,60,047.30 with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Direction to Recovery Officer to distribute proceeds.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 390 of 2022 Date of Institution: 08.11.2021 Date of Decision: 24.07.2025

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at SARB, Ambedkar Chowk, Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sharanjit Singh s/o Sh. Joga Singh r/o H.no.95, Village Dhuga Kalan, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshairpur, Punjab.

¶8

Lakhvir Singh s/o Sh. Ram Dass r/o H.no. 31, Village Dhuga Kalan, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiapur, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. DK Gupta proxy counsel for Sh. AS Gagrha, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants - ex parte .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.27,60,047.30p with interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests from 08.11.2021.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

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. 27,60,047.30p with interest against Sh. Sharanjit Singh and another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 01.03.2014, it had granted a loan of Rs.20.00Lacs to Defendant no. 1 in the form of P.B.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). Defendant no. 2 stood as the guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @10.60% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 08.11.2021, a sum of Rs.27,60,047.30p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

¶18

3. On 07.04.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 04.03.2024, they were proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Balbir Raj, Chief Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-18. 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.20.00Lacs and on 08.11.2021, a sum of Rs.27,60,047.30p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.27,60,047.30p (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Sixty Thousand Forty Seven and Thirty Paise Only) with interest @10.60% per annum with half- yearly rests from 08.11.2021, 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
01.09.2025,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgaged property(ies) 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 parties.
Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 24.07.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sharanjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sharanjit 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

Bank of Baroda versus J and R Associates

Punjab National Bank versus M/s S. Enterprises

Icici Bank Limited versus Bhawani Kumar Singh

Vidyadhar Pandey and others versus Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Balam Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Kasmir Singh