Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Mamta Rani

DRT16 Jul 2026OA/356/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs.21.44 Lakhs. The court reduced the claimed interest rate from 11% to 8% per annum considering the agricultural context and granted a certificate for recovery via asset sale.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.21,44,222.00 with simple interest @8% p.a. to be effected by sale of hypothecated agricultural machinery or attachment of personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Mamta Rani — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 356/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 16.07.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having it's Corporate Centre at State Bank Bhawan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, one of the Local Head Office at Sector 17-A, Chandigarh and one of it's Local Branch at AMCC, Phagwara, Kapurthala (Punjab) through it's Chief Manager, Sh. Naresh Kumar Rattan.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Smt. Mamta Rani W/o Sh. Ashok Kumar, R/o Malewal Kohli, Malewal, PO Kathgarh, Balachaur, District SBS Nagar, Punjab-144522

¶9

.……Defendant

¶10

Advocate:

¶11

Argued by Ms. Anjali, Advocate proxy for Sh. Vinish Singla, Advocate for the applicant

¶12

None for Defendant (already ex parte vide order dated 02.07.2026)

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.21,44,222.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lac Forty Four Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Naresh Kumar Rattan, 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.19.61 Lacs for purchase of Tractor and other agriculture implements, vide Loan Application Form dated 26.07.2024, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

¶16

OA/356/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SMT. MAMTA RANI

¶17

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.19.61 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 05.08.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant vide Letter of Arrangement dated 30.07.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA.

¶18

Defendant hypothecated his Tractor that’s Agri King AKT-54, having Engine no. P5.2001/2420055, Chassis no. 54KWE0000458 and other agriculture implements i.e. 8ft Rotavator, Cultivator 11 Tine, 20’ Trolley, Land Label, Jindra, Lift Sakanja etc. vide Hypothecation Agreement dated 30.07.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Invoice dated 10.08.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Invoice dated 25.05.2024, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; As per affidavit of Sh. Sohal Lal, Manager of the applicant, filed on 15.07.2026 vide Dairy no.12800, Registration Certificate of the hypothecated Tractor has not been issued by the concerned Registration Office. Documents executed : Account Statement up to 25.02.2026, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 08.08.2025, which is Annexure A8 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.21,44,222.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lac Forty Four Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Two only), which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notices but she 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 no one appeared on behalf of defendant. Hence, she was proceeded ex-parte on 02.07.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Naresh Kumar Rattan, Chief Manager, State Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex parte arguments and perused record.

¶19

¶20

OA/356/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SMT. MAMTA RANI

¶21

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.

¶22

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A8 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant approached applicant for availing of the Term Loan, which was granted to her and for that she 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.21,44,222.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lac Forty Four Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Two only), along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶23

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant has claimed interest @9.00% p.a. plus 2.00% p.a. penal interest with monthly rests from 26.02.2026 till the realization.

¶24

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 agricultural machinery, 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.

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,44,222.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lac Forty Four Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Two

¶26

¶27

OA/356/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SMT. MAMTA RANI

¶28

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 agricultural machinery 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 31.07.2026 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: 16.07.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Smt. Mamta Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Mamta Rani

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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurpreet Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Beant Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Chawla Textiles Traders and Others

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sh. Jaswinder Singh Alias Jasvinder Singh and Another

Central Bank of India versus Sh. yogesh passi