Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jashanpreet Singh

DRT27 Jul 2026OA/1333/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 27.41 Lakhs against a defaulting borrower. The defendant appeared ex-parte. The Tribunal granted the recovery claim but reduced the interest rate from claimed 11% to 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; recovery certificate issued for Rs. 27,41,223.00 including interest at 8% p.a.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1333/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 18.09.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 27.07.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400021 carrying on its Business of Banking in India and abroad, having one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17A, Chandigarh and having its Branch amongst other places at Kila Raipur Road, Delhon, District Ludhiana, Punjab- 141118 through its Branch Manager, Sh. Rajesh Kumar

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Jashanpreet Singh, S/o Sh. Jarnail Singh, R/o Village and Post Office Mansuran, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab- 142029

¶10

….……Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Vivek Verma, Advocate for applicant

¶13

None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 04.05.2026)

¶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. 27,41,223.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Forty One Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Three Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Branch Manager o f the applicant who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Notification dated 22.05.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

2 OA/1333/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. JASHANPREET SINGH

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs. 27.00 Lacs vide Application dated 09.09.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 27.00 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 18.09.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶18

Defendant hypothecated his movable assets namely Mahindra and Mahindra Limited Tractor bearing Registration no. PB10JW1349, Engine no. NRD5SEE0088 and Chassis no. MBNWHBF9FRND01771 vide RC filed on 24.07.2026 in compliance of order dated 08.05.2026, Precision Planter, Mobile Shredder, Potato Planter and Super Seeder vide Quotation dated 22.08.2024, Performa Invoice dated 29.08.2024, Booking Receipts dared 05.09.2024 and 22.08.2024, Tax Invoices and Sale Certificate dated 01.10.2024 and 20.09.2024, which are Annexure A5 to A10 to this OA. Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement dated 18.09.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Letter dated 15.03.2025, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Notice dated 12.03.2025, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 06.02.2025 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A14 to this OA and Demand Notice dated 03.07.2025, which is Annexure A15 to this OA. 5. 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. 27,41,223.00 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.

¶19

3 OA/1333/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. JASHANPREET SINGH

¶20

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 04.05.2026.

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Branch Manager, State Bank of India has been filed.

¶22

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶23

It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶24

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A15 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 Rs. 27,41,223.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Forty One Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Three Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00%p.a. plus @2% penal interest with monthly rests from 17.09.2025 till realization.

¶25

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 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

¶26

4 OA/1333/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. JASHANPREET SINGH

¶27

just and appropriate to grant 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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.27,41,223.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Forty One Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Three 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 assets 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.

¶29

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 11.08.2026. 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: 27.07.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jashanpreet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jashanpreet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Jagsir Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sarabjit Atwal@ Sarabjit Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Pargat Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Kulbir and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S N. K. Industries and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Sun Spot Industries and Others