Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manjit Singh

DRT21 Oct 2025OA/487/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the State Bank of India's application for recovery of a loan of Rs. 32,45,343.00 from the defendant. The Tribunal modified the claimed interest rate to 8%p.a. and directed recovery via sale of mortgaged and hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 32,45,343.00 with simple interest @ 8% p.a. from date of filing; sale of mortgaged/hypothecated properties if dues unsatisfied.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Manjit Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.487/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 21.10.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the provisions of The State Bank of India Act 1955, having its Corporate Office at Madam Cama Road, Mumbai carrying on its Business of Banking in India and abroad having one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17, Chandigarh and one of its specialized Branch known as Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Administrative Office, 3rd Floor, Fountain Chowk, Civil Lines, Ludhiana 141001 through its General Power of Attorney holder Sh. Chanchal Singh, Chief Manager of the Applicant.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Manjit Singh son of Sh. Mohinder Singh resident of H. No. 10 Village Mohie, Tehsil and District Ludhiana.

¶9

….……Defendant Advocates:

¶10

Argued by Sh. Amrit Singh Kang, Advocate for applicant (through VC)

¶11

Defendant is ex parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.32,45,343.00p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Forty Three Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Chanchal Singh, Chief Manager, of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms Gazette Notification published in Gazette of India dated 26^th September, 1959, 26^th August, 1972 and 2^nd May, 1987 issued under Regulations No.76 & 77 of State Bank of India

¶14

2 OA/487/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANJIT SINGH

¶15

Regulations framed in Exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section 3 of section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of the Central Government. Notification dated 27.03.1987 and 31.08.2005, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 14.09.2012, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶17

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 15.09.2012, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. Thereafter, the limit was renewed vide Renewal dated 21.05.2018, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶18

Defendant had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 16K-00M situated at Village Mohie, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab vide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no.1771 dated 08.10.2012, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Documents executed:-Deed of hypothecation dated 13.10.2012, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; BC Letters dated 15.06.2015, 21.05.2018, 19.04.2021 & 16.03.2024, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 11.02.2025, which is Annexure A8 to this OA and Statement of account, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶19

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.32,45,343.00p, which is recoverable and the defendant were served recall notices but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶20

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 26.09.2025.

¶21

3 OA/487/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANJIT SINGH

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Chanchal Singh, Chief Manage r, State Bank of India, has been filed.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned counsel through Video Conferencing that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.32,45,343.00p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Forty Three Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶25

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. with half yearly rest from 02.03.2025.

¶26

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶27

4 OA/487/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANJIT SINGH

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.32,45,343.00p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Forty Three Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendant in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶29

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 31.10.2025.

¶32

Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendant through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶33

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 21.10.2025.

¶34

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶35

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. 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

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Shree Mahavir Ji Creation and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Gujri Industries International Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Messrs Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Randhir Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjit Singh and Another