Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harbhajan Singh and another

DRT22 Jun 2026OA/1807/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed anOriginal Application under the RDB Act by the State Bank of India against borrowers and a guarantor. The bank proved a defaulted KCC loan of approx Rs. 25 Lacs. The Tribunal allowed recovery of the principal sum with simple interest at 8% p.a. and authorized enforcement via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Direction to recover Rs. 25,17,499.00 plus simple interest at 8% p.a. from the defendants, jointly and severally, via sale of properties or attachment of assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1807/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 03.10.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.06.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate constituted under the provisions of the State Bank of India, 1955 (23 of 1955) and the successor to State Bank of Patiala under the acquisition of State Bank of Patiala Order 22.02.2017 passed by the Central Government under section 35 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra400021 carrying on its business of Banking in India and abroad, having one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17A, Chandigarh having its Branch Office at Civil Hospital Road, Opposite Ram Leela Ground, Ropar, District Roop Nagar, Punjab through its Branch Manager, Ms. Navjot Kaur

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Harbhajan Singh, S/o Sh. Pritam Singh, R/o Village Khanpur, Post Office Hafizabad, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Roop Nagar, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Karam Singh, S/o Sh. Hakam Singh, R/o Village Paprala, District Roop Nagar, Punjab- 140001

¶11

…….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Tarlok Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Banni Thomas, Advocate for applicant

¶14

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 17.06.2026)

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 25,17,499.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventeen Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Navjot Kaur, Branch Manager o f the applicant who is competent to institute the

¶17

2 OA NO. 1807/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶18

Original Application in terms of Gazette Notifications dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 27.03.1987 issued by the Executive Committee of the Central Board Directors in exercise of the power conferred on it under Regulation nos. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations, 1955 made by Reserve Bank of India in exercise of powers conferred on it by section 50 (3) of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 3.00 Lacs vide Application Form dated 28.09.2012, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for enhancement of KCC Limit to Rs. 8.00 Lacs vide Application Form dated 30.08.2013, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for enhancement of KCC Limit to Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Application Form dated 27.01.2016, which is Annexure A13 to this OA. Thereafter, defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for renewal of KCC Limit of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Application cum Appraisal dated 13.03.2019, which is Annexure A20 to this OA.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs. 3.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 28.09.2012, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the enhancement of KCC Limit to Rs. 8.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter, which is Annexure A8 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the enhancement of KCC Limit to Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 09.02.1016, which is Annexure A14 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned renewal of KCC Limit of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 13.03.2019, which is Annexure A21 to this OA. Defendant no.

¶21

2 stood as guarantor.

¶22

Defendant no. 1 mortgaged his immovable properties which are: i. Land measuring 04 Bigha 16 Biswa situated at Village Hafizabad, Hadbast no. 137, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Roop Nagar, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 1192 dated 19.09.2012 along with its translation and Declaration /s 4 (1) of the Punjab Agriculture Credit Operations and Miscellaneous

¶23

3 OA NO. 1807/2022

¶24

STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶25

Provisions (Bank) Act, 1978 dated 29.08.2013, which are Annexure A3 and A9to this OA;
ii. Land measuring 04 Bigha 16 Biswa situated at Village Taprian
Dayal Singh, Hadbast no. 134, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District
Roop Nagar, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4 (1) of the Punjab
Agriculture Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions
(Bank) Act, 1978 dated 29.01.2016 and Letter dated
27.01.2016, which areAnnexure A15 and A16to this OA;
Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement, Deed of Guarantee
and Undertaking, all dated 28.09.2012, which areAnnexure A4 to A6
to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement, Deed of Guarantee and
Undertaking, all dated 30.08.2013, which areAnnexure A10 to A12
to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement, Deed of Guarantee and Consent
Letter, all dated 09.02.2016, which areAnnexure A17 to A19to this
OA; Report of Investigation dated 18.12.2019, which isAnnexure
A22to this OA; Hypothecation Agreement and Deed of Guarantee,
both dated 18.02.2019, which areAnnexure A23 and A24to this
OA; Revival Letters dated 28.12.2018 and 04.01.2020, which are
Annexure A25 and A26to this OA; Letter dated 21.07.2019, which
isAnnexure A27to this OA; Legal Notice dated 23.06.2022 along with postal receipts, which isAnnexure A28to this OA; Statement of
Account, which isAnnexure A29 (Colly)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. 25,17,499.00, which is recoverable and the defendants
were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding
amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application
and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.
6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this
Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 17.06.2026.
7. In support of the OA, affidavit ofMs. Navjot Kaur, Branch
Manager, State Bank of Indiahas been filed.
8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

4 OA NO. 1807/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶27

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

¶28

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A29 (Colly) to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no. 1 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. Defendants had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 25,17,499.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventeen Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Nine Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶29

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.65%p.a. from the date of filing of the application till the realization.

¶30

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 properties/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, 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.

¶31

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,17,499.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Seventeen Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Nine Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current

¶32

5 OA NO. 1807/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶33

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 mortgaged properties of defendant no. 1 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 defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶34

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 07.07.2026.

¶37

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶38

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 22.06.2026

¶39

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶40

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harbhajan Singh and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harbhajan Singh and another

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. Gurnam Singh

Axis Bank Limited versus M/S a F Cloth House and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Narinder Pal Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Ar Polyvin and Another

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus M/S Shraman Strips Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Yes Bank Limited versus M/S Samrat Trading Co. and Others