Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Sampuran Singh

DRT20 Feb 2026OA/805/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of ₹23,74,538.52 plus interest claimed against the defendant for a defaulted agricultural loan secured by mortgage, directing the issuance of a recovery certificate and appearance of parties before the Recovery Officer.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed for recovery of ₹23,74,538.52 with interest; Recovery Certificate issued; Defendant directed to appear before Recovery Officer for distribution of sale proceeds.

Punjab National Bank versus Sampuran Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 805/2023 Date of Institution: 13.04.2023 Date of Decision: 20.02.2026

¶4

Punjab National Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Simble Chowk, Batala, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sampuran Singh s/o Sh. Gurbachan Singh, r/o H.No.69, V.P.O. Nawan Pind Taragarh, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

¶8

……….Defendant

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Sh. Sampuran Singh proxy counsel for Sh. K.B.S. Mann, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶11

Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 28.08.2024 .

¶12

OA for the Recovery of ₹23,74,538.52p with interest @9% per annum with yearly rests from 13.04.2023.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Punjab National Bank has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹23,74,538.52p with interest against Sh. Sampuran Singh (defendant).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 12.09.2014, it had granted a loan of ₹12.00 Lacs to defendant in the form of K.C.C Limit for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had mortgaged his land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @9% per annum with yearly rests. Defendant had duly acknowledged his liability towards the debt on 03.03.2017, 03.09.2018 and 02.09.2021. On 16.03.2023, a sum of ₹23,74,538.52p was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶16

¶17

On 22.05.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 28.08.2024, he was proceeded ex parte .

¶18

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Baljinder Singh, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11. 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 ₹12.00 Lacs and on 16.03.2023, a sum of ₹23,74,538.52p was due.

¶19

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹23,74,538.52p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy Four Thousand Five Hundred Thirty Eight and Paise Fifty Two Only) with interest @9% per annum with yearly rests from 13.04.2023, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant.

¶20

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 01.04.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the party.

¶21

Pronounced in the open Court.	(A S Narang)
Dated: 20.02.2026	Presiding Officer
MANOJ KALRA	DRT-1, Chandigarh

Punjab National Bank v. Sampuran Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Sampuran 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

Thanooja Kappil versus Urban Co. operative Bnak Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus M/s Singla Trading Company

Icici Bank Limited versus Satwant Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Amit Doda

Ms Balya Cements Pvt. Ltd. versus Canara Bank

Jainy Jenson versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited