Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mangat Singh and Another

DRT12 Jan 2026OA/1113/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application by State Bank of India against defendants. Due to lack of representation, the matter was heard ex-parte. The Tribunal decreed the recovery of loan amount and fixed interest at 8% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.29,30,275.00 with costs and interest @ 8% p.a.; Liberty to enforce claim via sale of properties or attachment of assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Mangat Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1113/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 20.07.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 12.01.2026

¶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 17-A, Chandigarh and one of its Branch Offices amongst other places at Dudhan Sudhan, Patiala, Punjab through its Branch Manager Sh. Tarandeep Singh.

¶7

……. Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Mangat Singh son of Sh. Swaran Singh, resident of Village Sarmastpur alias Jalalabad, PO Gharam, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala-147111, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Jasvir Singh son of Sh. Faqir Singh, resident of Village Jalalabad, PO Gharam, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala147111, Punjab.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Shubham Pabbi, Advocate for Sh. Jatinder Kumar, Advocate for Applicant

¶14

Defendant already ex-parte vide order dated 05.08.2025

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.29,30,275.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs, Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notification published in Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 under

¶17

2 OA/1113/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. MANGAT SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶18

Regulation no. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations framed in exercising of the powers conferred by Sub Section 3 of Section 50 of State Bank of India Act, 1955 with the previous sanction of Central Government.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs for purchase vide loan application dated 04.05.2015, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 04.05.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the renewal of the Limit vide renewal sanction dated 05.07.2018 and 23.12.2019, which are Annexures A7 and A8 to this OA.

¶21

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. measuring 14Bigha-8Biswa situated at Majra Kalan alias Mali Majra, Hadbast No. 250, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala, Punjab vide declaration u/s 4(1) dated 04.05.2015 along with jamabandi for the year 2012-13, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement dated 06.05.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Undertaking dated 04.05.2015, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Consent for Disclosure of information, Deed of Guarantee, both dated 06.05.2015, which are Annexures A5 and A6 to this OA; Legal notice dated 30.06.2024, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Revival Letters dated 30.04.2018 and 10.03.2021, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Account Statement with certificate, which is Annexure A12 to this OA.

¶23

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.29,30,275.00, which is recoverable and the defendants 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.

¶24

3 OA/1113/2024

¶25

STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. MANGAT SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶26

The defendant was served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 05.08.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Branch Manager , State Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶27

It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant 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 A12 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.29,30,275.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs, Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Five 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.

¶28

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 from 04.06.2024 till realization.

¶29

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 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

¶30

4 OA/1113/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. MANGAT SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶31

@8.00%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.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.29,30,275.00 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lacs, Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Five Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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.

¶33

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 28.01.2026 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: 12.01.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mangat Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mangat Singh and Another

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 Sh. Jaswinder Singh

Bhagirath Impex and Others versus Axis Bank Ltd. and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Daljit Kaur and Another

State Bank of India versus M/S Universal Traders and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Chaman Lal and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Jaljit Singh and Others