Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anuj Singh

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/694/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India against Anuj Singh for recovery of a defaulted auto loan of Rs. 21,70,032.91. After hearing ex-parte arguments, the Tribunal granted recovery along with simple interest at 08% p.a. and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

The defendant is liable to pay Rs. 21,70,032.91 plus costs and simple interest at 08% p.a. Recovery Certificate issued; recovery via sale of assets ordered.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Anuj Singh — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.694/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 09.05.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 27.08.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate constituted under the provisions of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) having its Corporate Office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra400021 carrying on its Business of Banking in India and abroad having one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17, Chandigarh having its Branch amongst other places at Shakti Nagar, Derabassi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140507 through its Chief Manager, Sh. Nishant Mittal

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Anuj Singh, S/o Sh. Paramjeet Singh, R/o Flat no. 1191, 11^th Floor, Ananda Tower 1A, SBP Housing Park, Derabassi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140507

¶10

2^nd Address: C/O Shree Ram Electronics, Showroom no. 40, Rosewood Estate, GBP Road, Bhagat Singh Nagar, Derabassi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab- 140507

¶11

3^rd Address: Flat no. A6, Prem Apartment, Dwarka, Sector 28, Bamnoli, Post Office Barthal, South West Delhi- 110077

¶12

….……Defendant

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Vivek Verma, Advocate for applicant

¶15

None for defendant (already ex-parte vide order dated 24.08.2026)

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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. 21,70,032.91 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Seventy Thousand Thirty Two and Paise Ninety One

¶18

2 OA/694/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. ANUJ SINGH

¶19

Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Nishant Mittal, Chief Manager o f the applicant who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Notifications, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant approached the applicant for the grant of Auto Loan of Rs. 19.00 Lacs vide Application dated 30.11.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs. 19.00 Lacs vide Arrangement Letter dated 02.12.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant. 4. Defendant hypothecated his movable asset namely Scorpio ND AT 2WD bearing Chassis no. MA1TJ2YGTR6M70036 and Engine no. YGR4L35133 vide Invoice dated 12.12.2024 and Sale Certificate, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶21

However in the OA it is mentioned that as per knowledge of applicant, the defendant did not register the vehicle with the Registration Authority.

¶22

Documents executed: Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation dated 02.12.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Performa Invoice dated 13.11.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Receipts dated 13.11.2024, 03.12.2024 and 12.12.2024, which are Annexure A6 to A8 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 08.01.2026 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A10 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A11 to this OA.

¶23

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. 21,70,032.91 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.

¶24

3 OA/694/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. ANUJ SINGH

¶25

The defendant was served summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendant and he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 24.08.2026.

¶26

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Nishant Mittal, Chief Manager, State Bank of India has been filed.

¶27

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶28

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.

¶29

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A11 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, account of the defendant was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 21,70,032.91 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Seventy Thousand Thirty Two and Paise Ninety One 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 pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.05%p.a. plus @2% penal interest with monthly rests from 07.05.2026 till realization.

¶30

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 asset, 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

¶31

4 OA/694/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. ANUJ SINGH

¶32

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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,70,032.91 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Seventy Thousand Thirty Two and Paise Ninety One 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 asset 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. 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 11.09.2026. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 27.08.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anuj Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Anuj 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. Ajmer Singh

Satkar Carrier and Movers versus Axis Bank and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Partap Singh through His Legal Heirs and Others

Canara Bank versus M/s Nirmal Sagar Enterprises and others

Bank of India versus Sh. Manjot Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Gs Trading Company and Others