Allowed

State Bank of India v. Jagtar Singh

DRT14 Oct 2025OA/689/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of Rs.33,82,104/- with interest against the defendant. The court held that the bank proved the loan advancement and outstanding dues, directing the sale of mortgaged land and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs.33,82,104/- with interest; directed issue of Recovery Certificate; ordered sale of mortgaged land.

State Bank of India versus Jagtar Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 689/2022 Date of Institution: 25.03.2022 Date of Decision: 14.10.2025

¶4

SBI (erstwhile State Bank of Patiala) having its branches all over India and a branch at ADB Branch situated at Purana Kila Barnala, Punjab. ……..Applicant Vs. Mr. Jagtar Singh s/o Sh. Bala Singh, r/o Village Thikriwala, Tehsil and District Barnala, Punjab.

¶5

……….Defendant

¶6

Advocates Sh. Lovish proxy counsel for Sh. S.K. Dhir, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 13.03.2024 . OA for the Recovery of Rs.33,82,104/- with interest @10.60% per annum with yearly rests from 25.03.2022.

¶7

ORDER

¶8

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.33,82,104/- with interest against Mr. Jagtar Singh (defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 31.05.2016, it had granted a loan of Rs.20.40Lacs to defendant in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.60% per annum with yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 25.04.2019. On 02.03.2022, a sum of Rs.33,82,104/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶9

¶10

On 11.05.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 13.03.2024, he was proceeded ex parte .

¶11

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Ms. Alka Rani, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11.

¶12

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.20.40Lacs and on 02.03.2022, a sum of Rs.33,82,104/- was due.

¶13

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.33,82,104/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Eighty Two Thousand One Hundred Four Only) with interest @10.60% per annum with yearly rests from 25.03.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. 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 defendant.

¶14

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 17.11.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land 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 party.

¶15

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 14.10.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Jagtar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Jagtar 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

Central Bank of India versus M/S Vishnu Traders

Punjab National Bank versus Ram Avtar Pal and Ors.

Icici Bank Limited versus Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) versus Sri Sanjay Kumar Bharti

City Union Bank Limited versus Balaji Steel and Pipes

Canara Bank versus Mallikarjun