Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Balbir Singh

DRT23 Jul 2025OA/702/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Chandigarh allowed the applicant's application for recovery of Rs. 31,60,941.00 dues from the respondent under Section 19 of the RDB Act, permitting recovery via sale of mortgaged properties under SARFAESI.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.31,60,941.00 with cost and simple interest at 8% p.a. via sale of hypothecated properties or attachment of personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.702/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 24.05.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.07.2025

¶6

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

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Balbir Singh S/o Sh. Gian Singh Resident of House no. 125, Village Jiwanpur, P.O. Hawas, Sub Tehsil Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶9

………. Defendant Advocates: Argued by Ms. Lovedeep Kaur, Advocate proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for the applicant

¶10

Defendant already ex-parte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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.31,60,941.00 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty Thousand Nine Hundred Forty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Pardeep Kumar Chauhan, Branch Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application as per State Bank of India Regulation, dated 27.03.1987, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶13

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs, vide Loan Application dated 24.08.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶14

2 OA/702/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BALBIR SINGH

¶15

The applicant sanctioned KCC Lmit of Rs.20.00 Lacs, vide Letter of Arrangement dated 13.09.2013, which is Annexure A3 to this OA, and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. Land measuring 16K-14M situated at Village Mangli Kadar, Hadbast No. 58, Tehsil and District, Ludhiana, Punjab vide Mortgage deed Vasika No. 7656 dated 03.09.2013, along with its Translation, which are Annexures A5 and 5T to this OA.

¶16

Documents executed: - Hypothecation Agreement dated 13.09.2013, which is Annexures A4 to this OA, Revival Letters dated 25.08.2016, 02.11.2018 and 15.06.2021, which are Annexures A6 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 21.06.2019, 11.03.2022 and 21.03.2024, which are Annexures A7 to A9 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexures A10 to this OA.

¶17

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.31,60,941.00, which is recoverable and the defendant was 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.

¶18

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte on 03.01.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Pardeep Kumar Chauhan, Branch Manager, State Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. 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 A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him and

¶19

3 OA/702/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BALBIR SINGH

¶20

for that he had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendant failed to pay back the loans as per the 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.31,60,941.00 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty Thousand Nine Hundred Forty One Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶21

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.75%p.a. with half yearly rests with @2%p.a. penal interest from 17.03.2024 till the realization.

¶22

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 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.

¶23

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.31,60,941.00 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Sixty Thousand Nine Hundred Forty One 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

¶24

¶25

OA/702/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. BALBIR SINGH

¶26

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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 28.08.2025. 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: 23.07.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Balbir Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Balbir 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 Sh. Deepak Kumar and Another

Jagdeep Singh and Another versus Tata Capital Finance Ltd.

Anita Marwaha and Another versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Messrs Azad Bakers and Others

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Harwinder Singh Purewal and Another