Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gurmeet Singh Chahal

DRT6 Aug 2026OA/333/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 23.51 Lacs. The Tribunal granted a recovery certificate and fixed simple interest at 8% p.a., ordering recovery from hypothecated or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Order issued for recovery of Rs. 23,51,469.00 with 8% simple interest from sale of hypothecated assets or attachment of personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 333/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 03.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.08.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having its Corporate Branch at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17-A, Chandigarh and having branches amongst other places at Fatehgarh Panjgraian, District Malerkotla and a Specialized Recovery Branch known as Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, SCO No. 15, 1st & 2nd Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 7-C, Chandigarh, through its Chief Manager & Principal Officer, Sh. Varun Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus Sh. G urmeet Singh Chahal, S/o Sh. Gurdev Singh Chahal, R/o Village Ferozepur Kuthala, Tehsil and District Malerkotla (Punjab).

¶8

.……Defendant Advocate:

¶9

Argued by Sh. V.K. Sharma, Advocate for the applicant None for Defendant (already ex parte vide order dated 04.08.2026)

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.23,51,469.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lac Fifty One Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Nine only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Varun Kumar, Chief Manager , of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.22.95 Lacs for purchase of Trolly and other agricultural implements, vide Loan Application dated

¶12

2 OA/333/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. GURMEET SINGH CHAHAL

¶13

11.08.2023, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Quotations dated 03.08.2023, which are Annexures A2 & A3 to this OA.

¶14

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.22.95 Lacs for purchase of Trolly and other agricultural implements, vide Letter of Arrangement dated 06.09.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated his agricultural implements i.e. Trolly, Baler and Rake etc. vide Hypothecation Agreement dated 06.09.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Invoice dated 24.02.2024, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Invoice dated 24.02.2024, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Invoice dated 08.09.2023, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Documents executed : Demand Notice dated 08.06.2024, which is Annexure A9 to this OA; Notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act dated 08.08.2025, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A11 to this OA. 5. The account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account, there was a debit of Rs.23,51,469.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lac Fifty One Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Nine only), 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 summons to appear before this Tribunal and after the service of summons, Sh. Gopal Singh Mahel and Sh. G.P. Bharti, Advocates appeared on behalf of defendant and filed their Memo of Appearance on 20.07.2026. Thereafter, no one appeared on behalf of defendant. Hence, he was proceeded ex-parte on 04.08.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Varun Kumar, Chief Manager, State Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex parte arguments and perused record.

¶15

3 OA/333/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. GURMEET SINGH CHAHAL

¶16

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.

¶17

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A11 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the Term Loan, 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.23,51,469.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lac Fifty One Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Nine only), along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00% p.a. with half yearly rests from 14.02.2026 till the realization.

¶18

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 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 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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.23,51,469.00 (Rupees Twenty Three Lac Fifty One Thousand Four Hundred Sixty 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

¶19

4 OA/333/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. GURMEET SINGH CHAHAL

¶20

of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of 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 21.08.2026 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: 06.08.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gurmeet Singh Chahal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gurmeet Singh Chahal

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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Parkash and Co. and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Himanshu Fabrics and Others

Shubchintak versus Idfc First Bank Ltd. and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Malhotra Cycle Industries and Another

Union Bank of India versus M/S Radhe Dairy Farm and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Dalveer Singh