Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manjinder Singh

DRT14 Jul 2026OA/1443/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 26.69 Lakhs from a defaulting borrower. The Tribunal proceeded ex parte and reduced the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a. from the date of filing the application.

What did the court decide?

Directed recovery of Rs. 26,69,722.00 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from the date of the order till realization.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1443/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 01.10.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 14.07.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body Corporate Constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Central Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having one of its Local Head Offices at Sector 17, Chandigarh having branches at different places and one of its AMCC Branch at Phagwara, District. Kapurthala, Punjab, through its Chief Manager, Sh. Naresh Kumar Rattan.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. M anjinder Singh Son of Sh. Amarjit Singh R/o Village Hayatpur Jattan, Tehsil Saroya, District SBS Nagar (Nawanshahr) (Punjab) - 144524 .……Defendant

¶9

Advocate:

¶10

Argued by Sh. Aseem Kataria, Advocate for the applicant

¶11

None for Defendant (already ex parte vide order dated 29.11.2025)

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.26,69,722.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Naresh Kumar Rattan, Chief Manager , of the applicant bank , who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Gazette Notification dated 02.05.1987, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶14

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.24.17 Lacs for purchase of

¶15

¶16

OA/1443/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANJINDER SINGH

¶17

Tractor with other agricultural implements, vide Loan Application dated 11.06.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.24.17 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 18.06.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶19

Defendant hypothecated his Tractor that’s Make SUKHMANI AGRO INDUSTRIES, Model No. AKT-54, Engine No. P52001/2420033, Chassis No. 54HWE000448, with Trolly 16*7, Laser Leveler Sports, Straw Reaper and Rotavator etc. vide Hypothecation Agreement dated 18.06.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Tax Invoice dated 01.07.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Tax Invoice dated 05.07.2024, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Tax Invoice dated 20.10.2024, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; As per Affidavit of Sh. Vikas Kumar Chaurasiya, Chief Manager of Applicant, filed on 13.07.2026 vide Dairy no. 12628, hypothecated Tractor has not registered with the competent Registration Authority by the defendant.

¶20

Documents executed : Insurance Policy/Provisional Cover dated 02.09.2025, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Insurance Policy/Provisional Cover dated 02.09.2025, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Demand Notice dated 26.06.2025, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; 5. The account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account, there was a debit of Rs.26,69,722.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two only), 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.

¶21

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal and no one appeared on behalf of defendant. Hence, he was proceeded ex-parte on 29.11.2025.

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Naresh Kumar Rattan , Chief Manager, State Bank of India, has been filed.

¶23

Heard ex parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

¶25

OA/1443/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANJINDER SINGH

¶26

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. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A11 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the Term Loan, 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.26,69,722.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two 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 2.00% p.a. penal interest with monthly rests from 30.09.2025 till the realization. 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 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.26,69,722.00 (Rupees Twenty Six Lac Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty

¶27

¶28

OA/1443/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. MANJINDER SINGH

¶29

Two 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. 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 29.07.2026 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: 14.07.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manjinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Manjinder 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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Anjali Enterprises and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Bajwa Traders and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Bhupinder Singh

Hdfc Bank versus B N Transport Co. and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Rs Freight Carrier and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Rajinder Pandey and Others