Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ram Singh

DRT23 Feb 2026OA/1560/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an OA filed by State Bank of India against Ram Singh for recovery of Rs. 48,70,204.65. The court directed payment with simple interest at 8% p.a. and authorized recovery through sale of hypothecated/ personal assets under SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 48,70,204.65 plus simple interest at 8% p.a. authorized from sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1560/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 13.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.02.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under The State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Central Office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17, Chandigarh and a branch amongst other places at Jand Mangoli, through its Branch Manager and Principal Officer Sh. Saurabh Gupta.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Ram Singh S/o Sh. Mangta Ram, Resident of Village Kami Khurd, Post Office, Jand Mangoli, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala

¶10

…….Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Harmanjit Singh Sethi, Advocate for the applicant Defendant already ex-parte vide order dated 18.05.2024

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.48,70,204.65 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Seventy Thousand Two Hundred Four and Paise Sixty Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Saurabh Gupta, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notification dated 26.09.1959 and 26.08.1972 issued by Executive Committee of the Central Board in exercise of power conferred on it under Regulation 76 & 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations 1955.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.25.75 Lacs, Agriculture Term Loan of Rs.10.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.1.00 Lac for Debt Swap

¶16

2 OA/1560/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. RAM SINGH

¶17

vide loan application dated 16.11.2015, which is Annexures P1 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned Credit Facilities Rs.37.00 Lacs (KCC Limit of Rs.26.00 Lacs, Agriculture Term Loan of Rs.10.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs.1.00 Lac for Debt Swap) vide Sanction dated 16.11.2015, which is Annexure P2 (Colly) to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. Letter of arrangement of KCC and Agriculture Term Loan dated 14.01.2016, are enclosed with Annexure P7 to this OA.

¶19

Defendant mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Agriculture Land measuring 43Bighas-04 Biswa (9.10 Acres) situated at Village Kami Khurd, Hadbast no. 373, Sub-Tehsil Ghanaur, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab vide declaration dated 2.01.2016 u/s 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978. Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 12.01.2016 along with hypothecation agreement dated 14.01.2016, which is Annexure P4 to this OA. Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement dated 14.01.2016, which is Annexure P3 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 01.01.2019 and 29.06.2021 which are Annexures P5 and P6 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 29.03.2022, which is Annexure P7 to this OA; Statement of accounts with Calculation Sheet which is Annexure P8 to this OA. 5. The KCC and Agriculture Term Loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.48,70,204.65 which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendant was served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 18.05.2024.

¶20

3 OA/1560/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. RAM SINGH

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Saurabh Gupta, 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. From the perusal of all the Annexures P1 to P8 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were 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 loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendant were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.48,70,204.65 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Seventy Thousand Two Hundred Four and Paise Sixty Five Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @15% p.a. with monthly rests from 01.08.2022 till the 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loans 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 @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶26

4 OA/1560/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. RAM SINGH

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.48,70,204.65 (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Seventy Thousand Two Hundred Four and Paise Sixty Five Only) with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts 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/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.

¶28

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 09.03.2026.

¶31

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.

¶32

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal. Dated: 23.02.2026

¶33

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

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ram Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Ram 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Rafiq Ahmad and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kulwant Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Raghbir Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Late Sh. Jassa Singh through His Legal Heirs

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Amarjit Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Dewan Singh