Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Pritpal Kaur

DRT23 Mar 2026OA/179/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against a borrower for recovery of Rs. 25.49 Lakhs classified as NPA. The Defendant appeared ex-parte. The Tribunal granted recovery rights under SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay Rs. 25,49,773.00 with costs; interest @08%p.a.; entitlement to recover via sale of hypothecated or personal assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Pritpal Kaur — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 179/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 29.01.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.03.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Corporate Centre at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having branches all over India and one of its branches situated at Khanna, New Mandi, District Ludhiana, through its Manager, Sh. Partap Yadav

¶7

……..Applicant Versus Smt. Pritpal Kaur W/O Sh. Gurdeep Singh, R/O Jarg, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana, Punjab

¶8

…….Defendant

¶9

Advocates:

¶10

Argued by Mr. Omkar Gupta, Advocate for the applicant

¶11

Defendant already ex-parte vide order dated 18.03.2026

¶12

FINAL ORDER 1. Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.25,49,773.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Three Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Partap Yadav, Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notifications dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972, 27.03.1987 and 29.10.2005 issued by the Executive Committee of the Central Board in exercise of powers conferred on it under regulation no.76 and 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations, in exercise of power, conferred by the sub-section 3 of section 50 of the State Bank of India Act with previous sanction of Central Government. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of Agricultural Credit of Rs. 27.50 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 27.09.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶13

¶14

OA NO.179/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. PRITPAL KAUR

¶15

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 27.50 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 06.10.2023, which are Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated agricultural machinery equipments i.e. Tractor model D155 with Registration No. PB10JH6945, Chassis no. AZADK1295537S3, Engine no. 4105NE34C1283369F32, vide Registration Certificate, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Baling Machine with rectangular bales 18-20 kg, Make GSA industries, Brand AGRIZONE Sr No- 0104, M-Code PH/4138/3465/2023/0104 and a Straw Rake, Make GSA industries, Brand AGRIZONE Sr No- 0006, M- code PBG61-2023RK0005, vide Tax Invoices, dated 04.10.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement dated 06.10.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Documents executed: - Legal Notice dated 14.05.2025, which is Annexure A6 to this OA and Statement of Accounts with certificate, which is Annexures A7 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.25,49,773.00 which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice, but she 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 she was proceeded exparte vide order dated 18.03.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Partap Yadav, Manager, State Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. 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 A7 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for

¶16

¶17

OA NO.179/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. PRITPAL KAUR

¶18

availing of the loan facility, which was granted to her and for that she 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.25,49,773.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Three Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶19

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.90%p.a. plus @2%p.a. penal interest with monthly rests, from 01.01.2026 till the realization.

¶20

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 uniform 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.25,49,773.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy 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

¶21

¶22

OA NO.179/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. PRITPAL KAUR

¶23

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 Recovery Officer on 15.04.2026. 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: 23.03.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer,

¶24

DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Smt. Pritpal Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Pritpal Kaur

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

Canara Bank versus Sh. Bahadur Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jatinder Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Sukhchain Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S M M Cotton Factory and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Sanjeev Traders and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Iqbal Singh and Another