Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Kulwant Singh

DRT19 Feb 2026OA/24/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-III, Chandigarh adjudicated an application by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 28.95 lakhs against a defaulting borrower. The court allowed the application, deferred the claimed interest rate to flat 8% p.a., and ordered recovery from mortgaged or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery order for Rs. 28,95,279.00 plus costs and future interest at 8% p.a. issued and recovery certificate directed.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 24/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 31.08.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.02.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Corporate Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector-17A, Chandigarh and one of its Branch at Jalapur (Kalomajra), Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab through its Branch Manager Ms. Divya Pandey.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Kulwant Singh S/o of Sh. Hakam Singh, R/o of H. No. 239, Dalima Vihar, Ward no.8, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶10

….……Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Ms. Seerat, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pankaj Beri, Advocate for the applicant (through VC)

¶13

Defendant already ex-parte vide order dated 23.09.2024

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.28,95,279.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Ninety Five Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Ms. Divya Pandey, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notifications dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 issued under Regulation no.76 & 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section 3 of Section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 with previous of the Central Government.

¶16

2 OA/ 24/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. KULWANT SINGH

¶17

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant approached the applicant for grant KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs, vide Loan Application dated 03.08.2016, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.20.00 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 12.08.2016 which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 4. Defendant mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land Measuring 24Kanals-00Marla situated at Village Jhansla, Hadbast no. 282, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab vide Declaration dated 12.08.2016 u/s 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Documents executed : Hypothecation Agreement, Letter of Undertaking, all dated 17.08.2016, which are Annexures A3 and A4 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 27.06.2019, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 25.11.2020, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Notice dated 01.08.2023, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Statement of Account with unapplied interest which is Annexure A9 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.28,95,279.00, which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices 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 notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 23.09.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Ms. Divya Pandey, Branch Manager, State Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶18

3 OA/ 24/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. KULWANT SINGH

¶19

It was argued by learned proxy counsel through video conferencing 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 A9 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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 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.28,95,279.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Ninety Five Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy Nine Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.15%p.a. plus 2% penal interest and half yearly rests from 19.08.2023 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 mortgaged property/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.

¶21

4 OA/ 24/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. KULWANT SINGH

¶22

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.28,95,279.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Ninety Five Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy Nine 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/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.

¶23

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal 07.03.2026. 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: 19.02.2026.

¶24

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

State Bank of India v. Sh. Kulwant Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Kulwant 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

Roman Steel Pvt. Ltd. and Another versus Canara Bank and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Bhajan Singh and Another

Bank of Baroda versus Sh. Mangal Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Daljeet Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Jatinder Singh Tiwana

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Gurvinder Singh