Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gobind Ram

DRT5 Aug 2026OA/46/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte original application filed by State Bank of India against Gobind Ram for recovery of a term loan of Rs. 27,77,776.00, ordering recovery with 8% simple interest and enforcement through asset sale.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,77,776.00 plus 8% p.a. simple interest by sale of hypothecated and personal assets via Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gobind Ram — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 46/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.01.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 05.08.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Central Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, having one of its Local Head Offices at Sector 17, Chandigarh, having Branches at different places and one of its AMCC Branch at Nabha, District Patiala, Punjab through its Chief Manager, Sh. Jatinder Kumar Salaria

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

Sh. Gobind Ram, S/o Sh. Gurmeet Singh, R/o Village Kahangarh Bhutna, PO Gajewas, Tehsil Samana, District Patiala, Punjab- 147101

¶9

….……Defendant

¶10

Advocates:

¶11

Argued by Sh. Aseem Kataria, Advocate for applicant (through VC) None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 03.08.2026)

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

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. 27,77,776.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Kumar Salaria, Chief Manager o f the applicant who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Gazette Notification dated 02.05.1987, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶14

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs. 25.38 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 09.09.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶15

2 OA/46/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. GOBIND RAM

¶16

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 25.38 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 16.11.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant.

¶17

Defendant hypothecated his movable asset namely Harvester Karma 930 bearing Registration no. PB11DJ2428, Engine no. RPHM101265 and Chassis no. KMW930I240353 vide RC, Registration Details, Tax Invoice dated 18.11.2024 and Insurance Policy dated 21.11.2024, which are Annexure A5 to A8 to this OA.

¶18

Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement dated 16.11.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 13.11.2025, which is Annexure A9 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A10 to this OA.

¶19

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. 27,77,776.00 which is recoverable and the defendant was served recall notice but he did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶20

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 03.08.2026.

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jatinder Kumar Salaria, Chief Manager, State Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel (through VC) 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 Annexure A1 to A10 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

¶22

3 OA/46/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. GOBIND RAM

¶23

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. 27,77,776.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Six 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. and @2% penal interest with monthly rest from filing of OA till 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 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.

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.27,77,776.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Six 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 asset of the defendant in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the

¶26

¶27

OA/46/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. GOBIND RAM

¶28

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 20.08.2026. 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: 05.08.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gobind Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Gobind Ram

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 Overseas Bank versus Sh. Karanbir Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus M/S Rihaan Enterprises and Others

Canara Bank versus Sh. Rajinder Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Jashanpal Singh and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Piara Singh and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Palwinderjit Singh and Others