Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Makhan Singh

DRT11 Jul 2025OA/698/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for recovery of Rs. 32,57,392. The court held the defendant liable to repay the loan principal plus costs and adjusted the claimed interest rate to a uniform simple interest of 08% per annum pending realization.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 32,57,392 plus costs and simple interest @ 08% p.a. from filing date till realization; entitlement to recover via sale of mortgaged properties or attachment of other assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.698/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 24.05.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.07.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act 1955 having its Corporate Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector-17A, Chandigarh and having branches all over India and one of its branch situated at ADB Phillaur, District Jalandhar through its Branch Manager.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Makhan Singh S/o Sh.Sardara Singh R/o Village Mand Chaunta, P.O. Chaunta, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶10

….……Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Ms. Lovedeep kaur, Advocate proxy for Ms.Puja Sharma, Advocate for the applicant

¶13

Defendants is already ex parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.32,57,392.00p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Fifty Seven thousand Three Hundred Ninety Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Branch Manager, o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of gazette notifications dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972, 27.03.1987 and 17.05.2001 issued by the Executive Committee of the Central Board in exercise of power conferred on it under Regulations no. 76 & 77 of State Bank of India

¶16

¶17

OA 698/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA V/S SH. MAKHAN SINGH

¶18

General Regulations, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub section 3 of section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955.

¶19

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 22.11.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Letter of arrangement dated 20.12.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶20

Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 19K-19 ½M situated at Village Mand Chaunta, Hadbast no.26, Sub Tehsil Kum Kalan, Tehsil and District Ludhiana Punjab v ide Registered Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no.1042 dated 10.12.2013, which are Annexures A5 & A5/T to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed:-State Bank of India regulations, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation agreement, Consent letter both dated 20.12.2013, which are Annexures A4 & A6 to this OA; Revival letter dated 18.05.2016, 30.11.2018, 13.10.2020 & 05.07.2023, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Acknowledgement of the balance dated 30.11.2018, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Legal notice dated 09.02.2018, 21.06.2019, 08.01.2020, 11.03.2022 and 19.03.2022 which are Annexures A9 & A10 to this OA and Statement of account, which is Annexure A11 to this OA.

¶22

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.32,57,392.00p, 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.

¶23

¶24

OA 698/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA V/S SH. MAKHAN SINGH

¶25

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 01.01.2025.

¶26

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, h as been filed.

¶27

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶28

It was argued by learned proxy 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 A11 o 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.32,57,392.00p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Fifty Seven thousand Three Hundred Ninety Two Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶29

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 rests with penal interest @2% from 17.03.2024 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, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while

¶31

¶32

OA 698/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA V/S SH. MAKHAN SINGH

¶33

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.

¶34

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.32,57,392.00p (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Fifty Seven thousand Three Hundred Ninety Two 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 applicant 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.

¶35

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 31.07.2025. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 11.07.2025.

¶36

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Makhan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Makhan 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

Canara Bank versus Messrs Jaskirat Textiles and Others

Axis Bank Limited versus Messrs Jaskirat Knitwear and Another

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Labhpreet Singh and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Late Sh. Buta Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pal Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Amarjit Singh