Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Sh. Sukhraj Singh

DRT27 Oct 2025OA/42/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debt Recovery Tribunal proceeding, the applicant bank sought recovery of outstanding dues from two respondents who were a borrower and a guarantor on an agricultural loan. The Tribunal examined the loan documents, mortgage security, and acknowledgment of liability. Finding the loan advanced and amounts due proved, the Tribunal allowed the application for recovery, declaring liability joint

What did the court decide?

Application for recovery of Rs 22,72,618.56 with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Defendants directed to appear for distribution of sale proceeds.

Bank of Baroda versus Sh. Sukhraj Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 42 of 2023 Date of Institution: 12.12.2022 Date of Decision: 27.10.2025

¶4

Bank of Baroda having its branches all over India and a branch at Abohar, Fazilka, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Sukhraj Singh s/o Sh. Naranjan Singh r/o Village Bhadar Khera, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶8

Sh. Balraj Singh s/so Sh. Naranjan Singh r/o Village Bhadar Khera, Tehsil Abohar, District Fazilka, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Ms. Seerat Sharma proxy counsel for Sh. Pankaj Beri, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,72,618.56p with interest @12.75% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.12.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Bank of Baroda (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.22,72,618.56p with interest against Sh. Sukhraj Singh and another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 14.03.20214, it had granted a loan of Rs.15.00Lacs to defendant no.1 in the form of K.C.C. Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant no.1 had mortgaged property (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant no.2 stood as the guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @12.75% per annum with half-yearly rests. The defendants had acknowledged the liability towards the debt on 14.06.2016, 25.06.2018, 08.03.2021. On

¶16

¶17

22.11.2022, a sum of Rs.22,72,618.56p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

3. On 13.01.2023, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put
in appearance. Vide order dated 05.04.2024, they were proceeded_ex_ parte.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Rajat Bhatia, 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.15.00Lacs and on 22.11.2022, a sum of Rs.22,72,618.56p was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.22,72,618.56p (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Two Thousand Six Hundred and Eighteen and Fifty Six Paise Only) with interest @12.75% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.12.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be
joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged
property 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
28.11.2025,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.

¶19

¶20

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: 27.10.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh Amanpreet (Law Researcher)

Bank of Baroda v. Sh. Sukhraj Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Sh. Sukhraj 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 National Bank versus Smt Seema Rani

Canara Bank versus Sh. Sukhwant Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Ninder Singh

Anjali versus Uco Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/S De Rigueur Apparels Private Limited

Canara Bank versus M/S Aadinath Plastics