Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harjit Singh

DRT11 May 2026OA/1324/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SBI filed an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act to recover ₹22.11 lakh principal with interest against Defendant Harjit Singh who had mortgaged land as security. Proceeding ex parte against the absent defendant, the Tribunal held the loan and interest were valid and allowed the recovery application.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹22,11,787/- with interest granted; sale of mortgaged land authorized; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Harjit Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1324/2022 Date of Institution: 20.06.2022 Date of Decision: 11.05.2026

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at CHITTI, District Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Harjit Singh s/o Sh. Swaran Singh, r/o Village Daula Arain, Tehsil and District Kapurthala, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Sh. R.K. Jindal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 15.01.2025 . OA for the Recovery of ₹22,11,787/- with interest @10.45% per annum with half-yearly rests from 20.06.2022.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹22,11,787/- with interest against Sh. Harjit Singh (defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 27.05.2016, it had granted a loan of ₹20.00 Lacs 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 @10.45% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 15.04.2019 and 15.02.2022. On 10.06.2022, a sum of ₹22,11,787/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶12

¶13

On 25.07.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 15.01.2025, he was proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-10. 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 ₹20.00 Lacs and on 10.06.2022, a sum of ₹22,11,787/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹22,11,787/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Eleven Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Seven Only) with interest @10.45% per annum with half-yearly rests from 20.06.2022, 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. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 15.06.2026, 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. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 11.05.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harjit 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

Bank of India versus Mr Faisal Khan

Yes Bank versus Rcc Limited Nad Anr.

Hdfc Bank versus Sahely Sari Palace and Ors.

Shishir Sharma versus Canara Bank

Anita Gupta versus Indian Bank

Federal Bank versus Simplex Infrastructures Ltd.