Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mohamad Ashiq Thoker

DRT8 Sept 2026OA/2044/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India against a borrower for recovery of a vehicle loan dues totaling ₹26,21,968 with interest. The borrower, despite being summoned, did not appear and the matter was heard ex parte. The Tribunal examined the loan documents, demand notice, and service details, finding the bank's case well-proven and granted the recovery of dues with a direction to sell the hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹26,21,968 with interest @13.80% p.a. from 19.12.2024 till payment allowed; recovery certificate issued; direction to sell hypothecated vehicle or attach other properties.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Mohamad Ashiq Thoker — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 2044/2024 Date of Institution: 19.12.2024 Date of Decision: 08.09.2026

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Shopian Tehsil & Distt. Pulwama J & K.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sh. Mohamad Ashiq Thoker s/o Sh. Ghulam Qadir Thoker, r/o Padapawan Shopian, Hir Pora, Distt. Shopian. J&K.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Ms. Lovedeep Kaur proxy counsel for Ms. Puja Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶11

Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 14.07.2025 .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of ₹26,21,968/- with interest @13.80% per annum with half-yearly rests from 19.12.2024.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹26,21,968/- with interest against Sh. Mohamad Ashiq Thoker (defendant).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 05.02.2019, it had granted Vehicle Loan of ₹22.00 Lacs to the defendant. To secure the loan, Defendant had hypothecated his vehicle bearing Registration No. JK22B3449 (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @13.80% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 20.01.2022. On 07.11.2024, a sum of ₹26,21,968/- was due from the defendant. Despite

¶16

¶17

repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶18

On 09.01.2025, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 14.07.2025, he was proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Bashir Ahmad Magra, Branch Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-9. 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 ₹22.00 Lacs and on 07.11.2024, a sum of ₹26,21,968/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹26,21,968/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Twenty One Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty Eight Only) with interest @13.80% per annum with halfyearly rests from 19.12.2024, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of the hypothecated vehicle 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 09.10.2026. 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: 08.09.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mohamad Ashiq Thoker

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Mohamad Ashiq Thoker

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Pathania Poultry Farm

Bank of India versus Sh. Jaspal Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Karnail Singh

Sh. Jagmail Singh versus Smfg India Home Finance Company Limited

Simranjit Singh versus Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Nisar Ahmad Bhat (Aka Nissar Ahmad Bhat)