Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Poonam and Another

DRT29 May 2026OA/472/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's claim for recovery of outstanding dues, including principal and uniform simple interest, from borrowers who failed to repay sanctioned home and life loans. Recovery was ordered from mortgaged and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 27,98,864.34 plus interest @7.20% p.a. punishable under SARFAESI Act.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Poonam and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 472/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 10.03.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.05.2026

¶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 one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17A, Chandigarh having Branches all over India and one of its Branches situated at Stressed Assets Recovery Branch (SARB), 3^rd Floor, Administrative Office Building, Fountain Chowk, Civil Lines, Ludhiana, Punjab through Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, Chief Manager

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Poonam, W/o Sh. Janak Raj, C/o Municipal Corporation, Zone D, Sarabha Nagar, near Sidhwa Canal, Ludhiana, Punjab 2^nd Address: C/o Medical Officer, Health Branch, Municipal Corporation, Middha Chowk, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶10

3^rd Address: House no. 231, Mahavir Jain Colony, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141001

¶11

Sh. Janak Raj, S/o Sh. Garib Dass, C/o Municipal Corporation, Zone D, Sarabha Nagar, near Sidhwa Canal, Ludhiana, Punjab 2^nd Address: C/o Medical Officer, Health Branch, Municipal Corporation, Middha Chowk, Ludhiana, Punjab

¶12

3^rd Address: House no. 231, Mahavir Jain Colony, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141001

¶13

…Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Ms. Lovedeep Kaur, Advocate proxy for Ms. Puja Sharma, Advocate for applicant

¶16

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 26.05.2026)

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 27,98,864.34 (Rupees

¶19

2 OA/472/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. POONAM AND ANOTHER

¶20

Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Four and Paise Thirty Four Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, Chief Manager of the applicant , who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that defendants approached the applicant for grant of Home Loan of Rs. 6.17 Lacs vide Application dated 30.01.2018. Thereafter, defendants approached the applicant for grant of SBI Life Loan of Rs. 58,000.00 for payment of premium vide Request Letter dated 21.02.2018, which is Annexure A8 to this OA. Thereafter, defendants approached the applicant for grant of Top-Up Loan of Rs. 8.30 Lacs vide Application dated 27.02.2018. Thereafter, defendants again approached the applicant for grant of Home Loan of Rs. 10.50 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 19.05.2018. Thereafter, defendants approached the applicant for grant of SBI Life Loan of Rs.1,60,400.00 for payment of premium vide Request Letter dated 18.06.2018, which is Annexure A20 to this OA.

¶22

The applicant sanctioned Home Loan of Rs. 6.17 Lacs vide Arrangement Letter dated 15.02.2018, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned SBI Life Loan of Rs. 58,000.00 for payment of premium vide Sanction Letter, which is Annexure A9 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Top-Up Loan of Rs. 8.30 Lacs vide Arrangement Letter, which is Annexure A11 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned Home Loan of Rs. 10.50 Lacs vide Arrangement Letter dated 13.06.2018, which is Annexure A15 to this OA. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned SBI Life Loan of Rs. 1,60,400.00 for payment of premium vide Sanction Letter dated 03.07.2018, which is Annexure A21 to this OA.

¶23

Defendant no. 2 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 135 Sq. Yards situated at Village Mauja, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab vide Title Deed bearing vasika no. 7826 dated 05.08.2002 along with its translation and Agreement to Mortgage dated 15.02.2018, which are Annexure A5, A5T and A6 to this OA.

¶24

3 OA/472/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. POONAM AND ANOTHER

¶25

Documents executed: ID Proofs, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Memorandum of Loan Agreement, Deed of Undertaking and Consent Letter, all dated 15.02.2018, which are Annexure A4, A6A and A7 to this OA; Agreement for Additional Loan dated 21.02.2018 and 18.06.2018, which are Annexure A10 and A22 to this OA; Loan Agreement Home Top-Up Loan, Consent Letter and Confirmation Letter, all dated 13.03.2018, which are Annexure A12 to A14 to this OA; Memorandum of Loan Agreement, Deed of Undertaking, Consent Letter and Confirmation Letter, all dated 13.06.2018, which are Annexure A16 to A19 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 19.02.2021, which is Annexure A23 to this OA; Statements of Accounts, which are Annexure A24 to A28 to this OA and Demand Notice dated 28.08.2021, which is Annexure A29 to this OA.

¶26

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts, there was a debit of Rs. 27,98,864.34, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶27

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal, but no one appeared on behalf of the defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 26.05.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Anil Kumar Gupta, Chief Manager , State Bank of India has been filed.

¶28

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶29

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.

¶30

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A29 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities, which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, the accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence

¶31

4 OA/472/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. POONAM AND ANOTHER

¶32

brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 27,98,864.34 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Four and Paise Thirty Four Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶33

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @7.35%p.a. in Home Loan Account no. 37542512464 and both SBI Life Loan Accounts, @7.40% p.a. in Top-Up Loan Account and @7.20% p.a. in Home Loan Account no. 37761540753 plus @2% penal interest with monthly rests from 11.02.2022 till the realization.

¶34

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, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 @07.20% p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶35

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.27,98,864.34 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Four and Paise Thirty Four Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @07.20% p.a. in all the loan accounts 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 mortgaged property of defendant no. 2 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 defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶36

5 OA/472/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. POONAM AND ANOTHER

¶37

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 19.06.2026. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶38

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 29.05.2026

¶39

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

State Bank of India v. Smt. Poonam and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Poonam and Another

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

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Saas Foods

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Mehar Deen

Bank of India versus Sh. Tehal Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Messrs Pilwan Earth Movers and Others

Hdfc Bank Litmited versus Sh. Harbans Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Amar Singh and Others