Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Santokh Singh and Another

DRT6 Feb 2026OA/550/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs.21.92 lakh principal plus interest against borrowers Santokh Singh and guarantor Amrik Singh, modifying the claimed interest rate to 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Release Recovery Certificate and order respondents to pay Rs.21,92,686 with uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. from date of filing till realization from hypothecated/sale of personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Santokh Singh and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.550/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 04.04.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.02.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under The State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Corporate Centre at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17-A, Chandigarh and one of its Branch at Kot Ise Khan, District Moga, Punjab through its Branch Manager Sh. Sunny Karir.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Santokh Singh S/o Sh. Gurbakshish Singh, R/o Village Dharam Singh Wala, PO Qadarwala, Tehsil & District Moga, Punjab

¶10

Sh. Amrik Singh S/o Sh. Gurbakshish Singh, R/o Village Dharam Singh Wala, Teshil & District Moga, Punjab

¶11

…….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Pankaj Beri, Advocate for the applicant

¶14

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 07.12.2024

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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.21,92,686.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Ninety Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sunny Karir, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of Gazette Notification dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 & 02.05.1987 issued under regulation 76 & 77 of State Bank of India Regulations framed in exercise of powers conferred by

¶17

¶18

OA/550/2024

¶19

STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. SANTOKH SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶20

Sub-Section 3 of Section 50 of State Bank of India Act, 1955 with previous sanction of the Central Government.

¶21

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 approached the applicant for the grant of KCC limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide loan application dated 14.02.2015, which is Annexures A1 to this OA. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶22

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 19.03.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶23

Defendant no. 1 had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 37Kanal-00Marla situated at Village Dharam Singh Wala, Hadbast no. 189, Tehsil Dharamkot, District Moga, Punjab vide declaration dated 16.03.2015 u/s 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶24

Documents executed: Hypothecation Agreement, Undertaking, Deed of Guarantee, all dated 19.03.2015, which are Annexures A3 to Annexure A5 to this OA; Notice dated 28.02.2017, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Notice dated 08.03.2024 which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶25

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.21,92,686.00 which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶26

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 07.12.2024.

¶27

3 OA/550/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. SANTOKH SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶28

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

¶29

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶30

It was argued by learned counsel 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 A8 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was 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 loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.21,92,686.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Ninety Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Six Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶31

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.80% p.a. plus 2% penal interest with half yearly rests from 02.03.2024 till the realization.

¶32

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 defendants, 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

¶33

¶34

OA/550/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. SANTOKH SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶35

@8.00%p.a. 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.

¶36

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,92,686.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Ninety Two Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Six Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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 defendants 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. 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 18.02.2026. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal. Dated: 06.02.2026.

¶37

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

State Bank of India v. Sh. Santokh Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Santokh Singh 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Harpinder Singh and Others

Global Educational Trust and Others versus Central Bank of India and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Late Sh. Jarnail Singh through His Legal Heirs

State Bank of India versus Sh. Bhupinder Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Narinder Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Sh. Amitava Sen Gupta