Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mukhtiyar Singh @ Mukhtiar Singh

DRT13 May 2026OA/1258/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I Chandigarh allowed SBI's application for recovery of a loan principal and interest against the defendant who failed to repay a K.C.C. Limit agricultural loan secured by mortgage, proceeding ex parte and issuing a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹31,15,234/- with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Interlocutory applications disposed of.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Mukhtiyar Singh @ Mukhtiar… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1258 of 2023 Date of Institution: 25.04.2023 Date of Decision: 13.05.2026

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Guruharsahai, District Ferozepur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh Mukhtiyar Singh @ Mukhtiar Singh son of Sh Darbara Singh resident of Village Dona Mattar, Tehsil Guruharsahai, District Ferozepur, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Ms. Seerat Sharma proxy counsel for Sh. Pankaj Beri, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶10

Defendant - ex parte .

¶11

OA for the Recovery of ₹31,15,234/- with interest @14.10% per annum with half-yearly rests from 25.04.2023.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

SBI (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹31,15,234/- with interest against Sh. Mukhtiyar Singh (defendant).

¶14

Bank’s case is that on 24.06.2015, it had granted a loan of ₹6.00Lacs 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.5.6 of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @14.10% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 18.04.2023, a sum of ₹31,15,234/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶15

¶16

On 07.08.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 22.08.2024, he was proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Aman Deep, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-7. 5. 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 ₹16.00Lacs and on 18.04.2023, a sum of ₹31,15,234/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹31,15,234/- (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Fifteen Thousand Two Hundred and Thirty Four Only) with interest @14.10% per annum with halfyearly rests from 25.04.2023, 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.5.6 of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 17.06.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property(ies) 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. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 13.05.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh (Law Researcher)

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mukhtiyar Singh @ Mukhtiar Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mukhtiyar Singh @ Mukhtiar 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

Suresh Kumar versus Indian Bank

Yes Bank versus Jagdeep Singh

Canara Bank versus Mr Nirmal Singh

State Bank of India versus Mr. Mashooq Ali

Canara Bank versus Mondal Enterprise Prop Abul Kalam Mondal and Anr.

Hdfc Bank versus Anand Sharma