Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Amarjit Kaur and Another

DRT7 Mar 2026OA/554/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 28,73,699 outstanding from two borrowers under KCC and Agriculture Term Loans. The court granted uniform interest at 8% per annum and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; defendants directed to pay Rs. 28,73,699 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a.; liberty to enforce claim via SARFAESI Act.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.554/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 22.03.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 07.03.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, and having its Corporate Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector-17B, Chandigarh and having amongst others, a branch at Ghanaur, Tehsil Rajpura District Patiala through its Branch Manager and Principal Officer Sh. Pramod Kumar Sharma.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Amarjit Kaur W/o Sh. Mahinder Singh, R/o H. No. 214-A, Village Chamaru, District Patiala- 147001.

¶10

Sh. Sohalpreet Singh S/o Sh. Rajinder Singh, R/o H. No. 214-A, Village Chamaru, District Patiala- 147001.

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Rajnish K Jindal, Advocate for the applicant (Through

¶14

VC)

¶15

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 14.06.2024

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.28,73,699.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Pramod Kumar Sharma, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide in the terms of General Regulation no. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section 3 of section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of the Central Government read with

¶18

2 OA NO.554/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. AMARJIT KAUR AND ANOTHER

¶19

notification published in Gazette of India dated 02.05.1987 and 18.08.2001. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.2.00 Lacs and Agriculture Term Loan of Rs.6.00 Lacs under KGC vide Loan Applications dated 21.03.2011, which are Annexures A1 & A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.2.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 03.05.2011, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and sanctioned and Agriculture Term Loan of Rs.6.00 Lacs under KGC vide letter of arrangement dated 21.03.2011, which is Annexure A6 to this OA and the terms and conditions are accepted by defendants. 4. Defendants mortgaged their immovable property i.e. Land Measuring 10Bigha (4 Bigha in name of defendant no. 1 and 6 Bigha in the name of defendant no. 2), situated at Village Chamaru, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab vide Mortgage Deed bearing vasika no. 2090 dated 21.03.2011, along with its translation, which is Annexure A9 to this OA. Documents executed : Letters of Undertaking, Hypothecation Agreements, all dated 03.05.2011, which are Annexures A4, A5, A7 & A8 to this OA; Collector Rate, which is Annexure A10 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 05.03.2019, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 12.03.2022, with postal receitpts, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Revival Letters dated 08.03.2014, which are Annexures A13 & A14 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 06.03.2017, which is Annexure A15 to this OA; Revival Letter dated 02.03.2020, which is Annexure A16 to this OA; Statement of Accounts, which are Annexures A17 & A18 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there were a debit of Rs. 28,73,699.00 which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶20

3 OA NO.554/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. AMARJIT KAUR AND ANOTHER

¶21

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 14.06.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Pramod Kumar Sharma, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. 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 A18 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 applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.28,73,699.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Nine Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @21.50%p.a. in KCC and @10.90% in KGC, with half yearly rests from 11.03.2022 till the realization. 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 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

¶22

4 OA NO.554/2022 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. AMARJIT KAUR AND ANOTHER

¶23

@08.00%p.a. in both 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.

¶24

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.28,73,699.00 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Nine Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both 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 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 25.03.2026. 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: 07.03.2026. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Smt. Amarjit Kaur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Amarjit Kaur 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

State Bank of India versus M/S Mohan Lal Vikas Kumar and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Nirmal Singh and Others

Bank of Baroda versus Sh. Lakhvir Singh through His Legal Heirs and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Gurpreet Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S Kula Majra and Company and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jasvinder Singh