Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Beer Singh

DRT19 Feb 2026OA/1674/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the SBI's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of ₹21,69,661/- plus interest against the defaulting mortgagee. The Tribunal issued a recovery certificate and directed the Recovery Officer to execute the sale of mortgaged land.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹21,69,661/- with interest allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Sale of mortgaged land directed.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Beer 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: 1674 of 2022 Date of Institution: 12.08.2022 Date of Decision: 19.02.2026

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Handiaya, District Barnala, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Beer Singh s/o Sh. Pal Singh r/o Village Handiaya tehsil and District Barnala, Punjab.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Ms. Lovedeep Kaur proxy counsel for Sh. Pankaj Beri, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶11

Defendant - ex parte .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of ₹21,69,661/- with interest @11.75% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.08.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

SBI (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹21,69,661/- with interest against Sh. Beer Singh (defendant).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 06.06.2014, it had granted a loan of ₹15.00Lacs 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.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.75% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 08.07.2022, a sum of ₹21,69,661/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶16

¶17

On 21.10.2022, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 28.01.2025, he proceeded was ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Nagendra Singh, Authorised Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-6. 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 ₹15.00Lacs and on 08.07.2022, a sum of ₹21,69,661/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹21,69,661/- (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty One Only) with interest @11.75% per annum with half-yearly rests from 12.08.2022, 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 01.04.2026, 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: 19.02.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh Amanpreet (Law Researcher)

State Bank of India v. Sh. Beer Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Beer 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 Sh. Dalip Singh @ Daleep Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Manimahesh Motor Works Pvt. Ltd.

Federal Bank versus Priyanka Saha and Anr.

Jagmohan Ladhar versus M/S Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Baltar Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Surendra Kumar @ Surinder Kumar