Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Daljit Singh Jeeta Commission Agent and Others

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/559/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable to repay Rs. 25,67,034 plus interest at 8% p.a., directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate, and ordered sale of mortgaged/hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs. 25,67,034 with interest @8% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Direction to realize dues via sale of mortgaged/hypothecated assets.

State Bank of India versus M/S Daljit Singh Jeeta Commission… — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.559/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.03.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.09.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate, constituted under State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Corporate Centre at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having branches all over India and one of its branches amongst other places at M C, Court Road, Moga District Moga, Punjab formerly, State Bank of Patiala, now known SBI (Transferee Bank of State Bank of Patiala, by way of amalgamation, the business including the assets and liabilities of the State Bank of Patiala vide notification dated 22.02.2017) through its Authorized Signatory Sh. Ashish Kumar, Manager.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Daljit Singh Jeeta Commission Agent, a Proprietorship Firm, through its sole Proprietor Sh. Daljit Singh S/o Sh. Joga Singh, having its place of business at Shop No. 104, Lakkar Mandi behind Bhag Singh Cinema Moga, District Moga (Punjab)

¶10

Sh. Daljit Singh S/o Sh. Joga Singh, a Proprietor of M/s Daljit

¶11

Singh Jeeta Commission Agent, a Proprietorship Firm, at Shop No. 104, Lakkar Mandi behind Bhag Singh Cinema Moga, District Moga (Punjab)

¶12

Sh. Satnam Singh S/o Sh. Amar Singh R/o H. No. 414, Block-E, BRS Nagar Ludhiana.

¶13

……… Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Omkar Gupta, Advocate for Applicant

¶16

Defendants already ex parte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against

¶19

2 OA NO.599/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS DALJIT SINGH JEETA COMMISSION AGENT AND OTHERS

¶20

the defendants for recovery of Rs.25,67,034.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Sixty Seven Thousand Thirty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Ashish Kumar, Manager, o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette notification dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972, 27.03.1987 & 29.10.2005 issued by Executive Committee of the Central Board in exercise of powers conferred on it under regulation No.76 & 77 of the State Bank of India, Regulations made by the RBI in exercise of powers conferred by the Sub section 3 of the Section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, with previous sanction of Central Government.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 had approached the applicant for grant of CC Limit of Rs.11.00 Lacs vide Application dated 11.06.2014, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 had requested the applicant for renewal of the limit vide Application for renewal dated 03.09.2015 and 23.09.2016, which are Annexures A8 and A10 to this OA.

¶22

The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs.11.00 Lacs vide Letter of Agreement dated 11.07.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the limit was renewed by the applicant vide letters of arrangements dated 03.09.2015, 23.09.2016 and 23.07.2017, which are Annexures A9, A11 and A12 to this OA.

¶23

Defendant nos. 2 & 3 mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. Shop (booth) no. 104 measuring 1Kanal-1Sarsai (302.5 Sq ft.), Near Bhag Cinema, Lakkar Mandi, Moga, Punjab vide equitable mortgage of title Deed bearing Vasika No. 283 dated 11.04.2014, along with Translation, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Letter of confirmation

¶24

3 OA NO.599/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS DALJIT SINGH JEETA COMMISSION AGENT AND OTHERS

¶25

deposit of Title Deed dated 11.07.2014, which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶26

Defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 hypothecated stock and book debts vide agreement of loan-cum hypothecation dated 11.07.2014, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Documents executed :- Notification dated 22.02.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Guarantee Agreement dated 11.07.2014, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Notices dated 06.08.2018 and 24.12.2018, which is Annexure A13 & A14 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 20.07.2020, which is Annexure A15 to this OA and Statement of account with interest calculation sheet certified under Banker’s Book Evidence Act, which is Annexure A16 to this OA.

¶27

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.25,67,034.00p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 24.04.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Ashish Kumar, Manager, State Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel 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 A16 to this OA, it is proved that the approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed

¶28

4 OA NO.599/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS DALJIT SINGH JEETA COMMISSION AGENT AND OTHERS

¶29

to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.25,67,034.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Sixty Seven Thousand Thirty Four Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.15%p.a. plus @2% p.a. penal interest with monthly rests from 05.03.2023 till the realization.

¶30

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/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, 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.

¶31

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,67,034.00p (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Sixty Seven Thousand Thirty Four Only) jointly and severally, 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 defendants in execution

¶32

5 OA NO.599/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS DALJIT SINGH JEETA COMMISSION AGENT AND OTHERS

¶33

proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶34

12 . Any other application pending stands disposed of . 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 15.10.2025.

¶36

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 23.09.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. M/S Daljit Singh Jeeta Commission Agent and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Daljit Singh Jeeta Commission Agent and Others

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

State Bank of India versus M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Resham Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Neeru Khosla

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Ravideep Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Beant Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjind Singh