Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jasveer Singh

DRT11 Aug 2026OA/587/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of a non-performing agricultural term loan. The defendant failed to appear. The court directed recovery of the principal amount along with reduced simple interest at 08% p.a. and authorized execution via Sale and Security Action Process.

What did the court decide?

Recovery ofRs.44,98,176.00; simple interest@08% p.a.;Recovery Certificateissued; liberty to enforce through sale of assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.587/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.04.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.08.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, and having Central Office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17-A, Chandigarh and one of its Branch at Chandigarh Road, Samrala, District Ludhiana through its Chief Manager Sh. Satanand Singh.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Jasveer Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o Village Mand Udhowal (43), Mand Udhowal, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, Punjab - 141115.

¶10

……. .Defendant

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for the applicant

¶13

None for Defendant (Already ex-parte vide order dated 14.07.2026).

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.44,98,176.00 (Rupees Forty Four Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Satanand Singh, Chief Manager of the applicant , who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms of the Gazette Notification dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 & 02.05.1987 issued under Regulation No. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (3) of Section 50 of State Bank of India Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of the Central Government, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

2 OA NO.587/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. JASVEER SINGH

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility for purchase of Tractor, Trolly, Planter, Super Seeder, Leveller and Potato Machine of Rs.44,00,000.00 vide Loan Application Form for Agricultural Credit dated 29.07.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan Facility for purchase of Tractor, Trolley, Planter, Super Seeder, Leveller and Potato Machine of Rs.44,00,000.00 vide Letter of Arrangement dated 29.08.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated his Moveable Assets i.e., Indo Farm Tractor 3060 along with Trolley, Planter, Super Seeder, Leveller and Potato Machine, bearing Engine No. IF45005787PS, Chassis No. CPS60HT4WD00013CM, vide Tax Invoices dated 02.09.2024, 19.07.2024, which are Annexures A5 & A6 to this OA and in compliance with the order dated 15.07.2026, the affidavit of Ms. Rimpy Rani, Chief Manager, filed vide diary no. 14190 dated 10.08.2026, confirms that the tractor has not been registered with the competent Registering Authority till date.

¶19

Documents executed : Hypothecation Agreement, dated 29.08.20204, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 08.12.2025, along with postal receipt, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA; Statement of account along with certificate, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶20

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, there was a debit of Rs.44,98,176.00, 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 summons to appear before this Tribunal, but no one appeared on behalf of the defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 14.07.2026.

¶21

3 OA NO.587/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. JASVEER SINGH

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Satanand Singh, Chief Managar, State Ban k of India h as been filed.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶25

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 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, loan account was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.44,98,176.00 (Rupees Forty Four Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred and 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 pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @9.00%p.a. with monthly rests with penal interest @2%p.a. from 18.03.2026 till the realization.

¶26

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 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 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.

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶28

¶29

OA NO.587/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS SH. JASVEER SINGH

¶30

Rs.44,98,176.00 (Rupees Forty Four Lacs Ninety Eight Thousand One Hundred and 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 Tractor, Trolley and its Agriculture Implements 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.

¶31

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 27.08.2026. 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.

¶32

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 11.08.2026

¶33

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶34

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jasveer Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Jasveer 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

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Kashmir Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Surjit Singh and Others

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Anwita Enterprises and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Mandeep Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sarwan Dass Alias Sarban Singh through Legal Heirs and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Amrik Singh