Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Raj Kumar

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/601/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal adjudicated an application filed by SBI for recovery of loan dues of Rs. 22,10,559/- against a borrower who failed to appear. The Tribunal allowed the application and directed issuance of a recovery certificate based on affidavit evidence proving the loan and NPA classification.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,10,559/- with interest allowed; issue of Recovery Certificate; directive for sale of property.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 601/2025 Date of Institution: 11.04.2025 Date of Decision: 27.08.2026

¶4

SBI, branch at Zainakadal Sarafkadal, Srinagar, J & K.

¶5

…Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Raj Kumar S/o. Sh. Rajender Singh R/o. Village Babroli P.O. Nangal Pathani Rewari, Distt. Haryana. Office Address: - Central Govt Defense, 2RR, HMT Zainakot, Village Kalho Halan Srinagar.

¶7

...Defendant

¶8

Advocates

¶9

Ms. Seerat Sharma proxy counsel for Ms. Puja Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants – ex parte.

¶10

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,10,559/- with interest @11.05% per annum with monthly rests from 11.04.2025.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

On 11.04.2025, SBI filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.22,10,559/- with interest against Sh. Raj Kumar (defendant).

¶13

Bank’s case is that on 11.12.2023, it had granted a Personal Loan of Rs.20 lacs to the defendant for personal use. The loan was chargeable to interest @11.05% per annum with monthly rests. The accounts were classified as NPA on 17.06.2024. On 11.04.2025, a sum of Rs.22,10,559/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶14

¶15

On 22.04.2025, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 05.03.2026, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Masarat Mohiuddin Malik Gulzar, Chief Manager, along with the loan and security documents. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.20 lacs and on 11.04.2025 a sum of Rs.22,10,559/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the Bank for the recovery of Rs.22,10,559/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Ten Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Nine Only) with interest @11.05% per annum with monthly rests from 11.04.2025, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 29.09.2026. 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court. (A S Narang) Dated: 27.08.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh

¶16

HARSH

State Bank of India v. Sh. Raj Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Raj Kumar

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 Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank