Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gurwinder Singh

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/295/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant's original application for recovery of Rs.25,03,261 due from the defendant. The court granted a uniform simple interest rate of 8% per annum instead of the claimed rate and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate and sale of mortgaged assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.25,03,261 with interest at 8% p.a. from filing date; issuance of Recovery Certificate; sale of mortgaged/hypothecated assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.295/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.02.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 30.01.2026

¶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 having branches all over India and one of its branch situated at New Grain Market, Nabha, District Patiala through its Branch Manager Sh. Sandeep Kumar, who is Authorized Officer.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Gurwinder Singh S/o. Sh. Ujagar Singh R/o. H.no.3, Village Surapur, Tehsit Nabha Distt. Patiala, Punjab.

¶9

…….Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Ms. Neha Arora, Advocate proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for Applicant

¶12

Defendant already ex-parte vide order dated 18.07.2024.

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.25,03,261.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Branch Manager & Principal Officer, of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of State Bank of India Regulations dated 27.03.1987, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 18.12.2013, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Thereafter, the

¶15

2 OA/295/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. GURWINDER SINGH

¶16

defendant approached the applicant for enhancement of the Limit to Rs.18.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 14.08.2014, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶17

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 06.01.2014, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned enhancement of Limit to Rs.18.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 20.08.2014, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶18

Defendant mortgaged his immoveable property i.e. land measuring 24B-00B situated at Village Surajpur, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab vide Mortgage deed bearing vasika no.3365 dated 26.12.2013, along with its translation, which are Annexures A7 and A7T to this OA & mortgage deed bearing vasika no. 1735 dated 14.08.2014, which are Annexures A11, A11T to this OA.

¶19

Documents executed : ID Proof of defendant in FILE 3, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Hypothecation agreement 06.01.2014 & 20.08.2014, which are Annexures A5 & A10 to this OA; Consent letter dated 18.12.2013 & 14.08.2014, which are Annexures A6 & A12 to this OA; Letter dated 20.08.2014, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Balance Confirmation letter dated 30.03.2017, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Revival letter dated 27.03.2020 , which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Legal notice dated 05.01.2023, which is Annexure A16 to this OA and Statements of account, which is Annexure A17 to this OA.

¶20

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.25,03,261.00, 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.

¶21

3 OA/295/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. GURWINDER SINGH

¶22

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 18.07.2024.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, has been filed.

¶24

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶25

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. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A17 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.25,03,261.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty One Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶26

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.95%p.a. with 2% penal interest and half yearly rests from 03.01.2023 till the realization.

¶27

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

¶28

4 OA/295/2023 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. GURWINDER SINGH

¶29

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.

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.25,03,261.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty One 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets 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. 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 12.02.2026. 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: 30.01.2026. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gurwinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gurwinder 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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Dharminder Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S K. P. S. Beverages and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Value Max Clothing and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kewal Singh and Another

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Deepa Paints and Sons and Another

State Bank of India versus Messrs Vallabh Fashions and Another