Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harinder Pal Singh

DRT29 Jan 2026OA/367/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an application by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 51.52 lakhs from the defendant. The court reduced the claimed interest rate from 10.60% to 8% per annum and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate pursuant to Part II of the RDBA.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 51.52,722.00 with simple interest @08.00%p.a. from filing date; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce via sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.367/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.02.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.01.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India, Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Office at State Bank Bhawan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having one of its Local Head Office at Sector-17, Chandigarh including one such branch at Malaudh, District Ludhiana, Punjab through its Branch Manager Sh. Avtar Singh, who is authorized to sign on behalf of the bank.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Harinder Pal Singh, Son of Sh. Davinder Singh, R/o Village Dudhal, P.O. Malaudh, Tehsil Payal, District Ludhiana, Punjab.

¶9

….……Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Rishab Gupta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for applicant (through VC)

¶12

Defendant ex parte vide order dated 27.06.2024

¶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.51,52,722.00 (Rupees Fifty One Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Avtar Singh , Branch Manager o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notification published in Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 issued under Regulations No.76 & 77 of State Bank of India General Regulation framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section 3 of section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of

¶15

2 OA/367/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARINDER PAL SINGH

¶16

the Central Government. Gazette Notification dated 27.03.1987 is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.40.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 25.06.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.40.00 Lacs vide arrangement letter dated 21.07.2015, which is Annexure A4 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant mortgaged his immovable properties i.e. land measuring 12Bigha-16Biswa-4Biswasi Pukhta (64K-1M) situated at Village Dudhal, Sub Tehsil Malaudh, District Ludhiana, Punjab vide declaration u/s 4(1) dated 07.07.2015, which is Annexures A6 to this OA; Jamabandi for the year 2012-2013, along with its translation, which is Annexures A7 to this OA. Documents executed: -Gazette notification dated 20.03.2017, which is Annexure A1 to this OA; Hypothecation agreement dated 21.07.2015, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Revival letters dated 03.11.2016 & 12.04.2019, which are Annexures A9 & A10 to this OA; Legal notice dated 22.01.2021 along with postal receipt, which are Annexures A11 & A12 to this OA and Statement of account with account closure enquiry, which are Annexures A13 & A14 to this OA. 5. 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.51,52,722.00 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 notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 27.06.2024.

¶18

3 OA/367/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARINDER PAL SINGH

¶19

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

¶20

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record

¶21

It was argued by learned counsel through video conferencing 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 A14 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.51,52,722.00 (Rupees Fifty One Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two Only) along with interest from the defendant, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶22

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. with half yearly rest form the 16.02.2022 till realization.

¶23

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 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

¶24

4 OA/367/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. HARINDER PAL SINGH

¶25

realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶26

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs. 51,52,722.00 (Rupees Fifty One Lacs Fifty Two Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two 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 assets/mortgaged properties 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.

¶27

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 11.02.2026. 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.

¶28

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 29.01.2026.

¶29

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harinder Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Harinder Pal 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

State Bank of India versus Sh.Jatinder Singh

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Davinder Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Satish Kumar and Others

State Bank of India versus Messrs Ks Toor Commission Agent and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Ranveer Singh and Others

Bank of Baroda versus Late Sh. Vinod Kumar Sharma through His Legal Heirs and Others