Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jaswinder Singh

DRT9 Jan 2026OA/28/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against Jaswinder Singh for recovery of Rs. 37,68,512.00. The Tribunal modified the claimed interest rate to 8% per annum and directed sale of hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.37,68,512.00 with simple interest @08.00%p.a. from date of filing; authority to sell hypothecated/mortgaged properties.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.28/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 14.12.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 09.01.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Centre at State Bank Bhawan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having one of its Local Head Office at Sector-17, Chandigarh having branches all Over India including one such branch known as Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 1^st Floor, SCO No. 15, sector-7-C, Chandigarh through its Chief Manager Sh. Agrish Kumar Verma.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus Sh. Jaswinder Singh Son of Sh. Sahib Singh, R/o Village Shergarh, Tehsil Patran, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶8

…….Defendant Advocates:

¶9

Argued by Sh. P.S. Arora, Advocate for the applicant

¶10

Defendant already ex-parte vide order dated 12.03.2025

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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.37,68,512.00 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Sixty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Twelve Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Agrish Kumar Verma, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide in terms of Gazette Notification published in Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 under Regulation no. 76 and 77 State Bank of India General Regulation framed in exercise of power conferred by section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

¶13

¶14

OA/28/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. JASWINDER SINGH

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.24.99 Lacs vide Loan application dated 24.09.2014 along with true translations, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶16

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.24.99 Lacs vide Letter of arrangement dated 04.11.2014, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 40K-00M situated at Village Shergarh, Tehsil Patran, District Patiala, Punjab vide D eclaration dated 31.10.2014 under Section 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Letter to sub registrar for creation of charge, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶17

Documents executed: Order/Gazette of India dated 22.02.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation agreement, Agriculture finance letter of undertaking, both dated 04.11.2014, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA; Legal notice dated 07.07.2023, along with postal receipt, which are Annexures A8 & A9 to this OA; Statements of account and statement of accrued interest, which are Annexures A10 & A11 to this OA and Revivals letters dated 19.07.2017, 30.05.2020 & 25.05.2023, which are Annexures A12 to A14 to this OA.

¶18

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.37,68,512.00, 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.

¶19

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 12.03.2025.

¶20

3 OA/28/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. JASWINDER SINGH

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Agrish Kumar Verma, Chief Manager , State Bank of India, has been filed.

¶22

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶23

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 A14 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.37,68,512.00 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Sixty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Twelve Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶24

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.75%p.a. with half yearly rests from 23.11.2023 till the realization.

¶25

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.

¶26

¶27

OA/28/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. JASWINDER SINGH

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.37,68,512.00 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs Sixty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Twelve 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.

¶29

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 23.01.2026. 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: 09.01.2026. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jaswinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jaswinder 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

Indusind Bank Limited versus Sh. Mahipal Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Messrs Khushal Agro Chemicals and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Harjinder Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Sarabjeet Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Modish Fashion Wears and Another

State Bank of India versus Messrs Kohinoor Sales and Another