Allowed

State Bank of India v. Harnek Singh

DRT22 Jan 2026OA/334/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the State Bank of India's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs.42.86 lakhs with interest against the defendant for agricultural loans. The order permitted recovery via sale of mortgaged land and appointment of a Recovery Officer.

What did the court decide?

Recovery application allowed; Recovery Certificate issued; Recovery Officer appointed to distribute sale proceeds of mortgaged land under Section 19(20-AB).

State Bank of India versus Harnek Singh — Landlord and Tenant | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 334/2023 Date of Institution: 17.01.2023 Date of Decision: 22.01.2026

¶4

SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at A.D.B. Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Mr. Harnek Singh s/o Sh. Malook Singh, r/o Village Dholanwal, P.O. Chonta, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶7

……….Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Ms. RK Grewal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 01.03.2024 . OA for the Recovery of Rs.42,86,743/- with interest @10.50% per annum with half-yearly rests from 17.01.2023.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

SBI has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.42,86,743/- with interest against Mr. Harnek Singh (defendant). 2. Bank’s case is that on 02.06.2010, it had granted a K.C.C. Limit of Rs.3.00Lacs and a Term Loan of Rs.2.00Lacs to defendant for agricultural purpose. Again on 13.06.2014, at the request of the defendant, bank granted another K.C.C. Limit of Rs.40.00Lacs to defendant for agricultural purpose. To secure all the loan facilities, Defendant had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @10.50% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 01.11.2021. On 04.01.2023, a sum of Rs.42,86,743/-

¶12

¶13

was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application. 3. On 28.02.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered
post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in
appearance. Vide order dated 01.03.2024, he was proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Sh. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Branch Manager along with
the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-
13.
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 loans
under various schemes and on 04.01.2023, a sum of Rs.42,86,743/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.42,86,743/- (Rupees Forty Two Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Seven
Hundred Forty Three Only) with interest @10.50% per annum with half-
yearly rests from 17.01.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land 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
25.02.2026,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the
mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.

¶14

¶15

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: 22.01.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

State Bank of India v. Harnek Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Harnek 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

Central Bank of India versus MD Rafikul Islam and Anr.

Punjab National Bank versus Oly Pramanik

Bank of Baroda versus M/s S.K. Enterprises

Indian Bank versus Mrs Sonal Rathi Proprietor of M/S Rathi Commodities and Ors.

Idbi Bank versus M/s Rahul Electric

Bank of India versus M/s Humara Pump Ram Janki