Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Satpal Singh

DRT7 Jul 2026OA/365/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte Original Application under Section 19 RDB Act, this Tribunal declared the defendant liable to repay a term loan of Rs.42,22,397.00. The Court modified the claimed interest rate and declared the defendant liable to the bank's dues.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.42,22,397.00 along with simple interest at 8% p.a. from the defendant, recoverable via sale of hypothecated assets or attachment of personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.365/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 06.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 07.07.2026

¶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 having branches all over India one of its Branch situated at Samrala, Chandigarh Road, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana through its Chief Manager Sh. Satanand Singh who is Authorized Officer.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Satpal Singh S/o Sh. Gurmel Singh @ Gurmail Singh, R/o. Village Rattipur, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana.

¶10

……..Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for the applicant None for Defendant (Already ex-parte vide order dated 20.06.2026).

¶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.42,22,397.00 (Rupees Forty Two Lacs Twenty Two Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Satanand Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of the Gazette Notification dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972, 02.05.1987 & 17.05.2001 issued by Executive Committee of Central Board in exercise of Power conferred on it under Regulation No. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations, in exercise of the Powers conferred by Sub Section (3) of Section 50 of State Bank of India Act, 1955, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

2 OA NO.365/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SATPAL SINGH

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan facility for purchase of Tractor and its equipment of Rs.42,16,000.00 vide Application Form for Agricultural Credit dated 05.06.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan facility for purchase of Tractor and its equipment of Rs.42,16,000.00 vide Letter of Arrangement dated 24.06.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated his Moveable Asset i.e., Agricultural Tractor Model 5050D Gearpro VI bearing Chassis No. 1VY5050DCRD070968, Engine No. PY3029D782434, Registration No. PB10JP3169 vide Tax Invoice dated 15.08.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA and Provisional Registration Certificate filed on 02.07.2026, in compliance of order dated 22.06.2026. Documents executed : Hypothecation Agreement dated 24.06.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 23.10.2025, along with postal receipt, which is Annexure A5A to this OA; Statement of account along with certificate, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, there was a debit of Rs.42,22,397.00, 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. 6. The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal, but no one appeared on behalf of the defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 20.06.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Satanand Singh, Chief Manager, State Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶17

3 OA NO.365/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SATPAL SINGH

¶18

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶19

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A6 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, loan account was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.42,22,397.00 (Rupees Forty Two Lacs Twenty Two Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Seven 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 pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00%p.a. with monthly rests with penal interest @2%p.a. from 30.11.2025 till the realization.

¶20

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 asset, 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.42,22,397.00 (Rupees Forty Two Lacs Twenty Two Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Seven Only), with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA

¶21

¶22

OA NO.365/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. SATPAL SINGH

¶23

till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated Agriculture Tractor 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 22.07.2026. 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: 07.07.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Satpal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Satpal 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

Indian Bank versus Sh. Amanpreet Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Harjit Trading Co. and Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Neha Enterprises and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Goyal Trading Company and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Vijay Kumar

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kamaljeet Singh