Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sh. Veer Sukhwant Singh

DRT19 May 2026OA/832/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of an outstanding loan amount along with interest under the RDB Act, directing the issuance of a recovery certificate and appearance before the Recovery Officer for property sale and distribution of proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; recovery of ₹23,26,258/- with interest; recovery certificate issued; defendant directed to appear before Recovery Officer.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Veer Sukhwant Singh — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 832 of 2023 Date of Institution: 18.04.2023 Date of Decision: 19.05.2026 SBI having its branches all over India and a branch at Sadiq, Tehsil Sadiq, District Faridkot, Punjab. ……..Applicant Vs. Sh. Veer Sukhwant Singh s/o Resham Singh r/o Vilage Butter, P.O. Mummara, Tehsil Sadiq, District Faridkot, Punjab.

¶4

……….Defendant

¶5

Advocates

¶6

Sh. Aseem Kataria, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant - ex parte . OA for the Recovery of ₹23,26,258/- with interest @12.15% per annum with half-yearly rests from 18.04.2023.

¶7

ORDER

¶8

SBI (Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹23,26,258/- with interest against Sh. Veer Sukhwant Singh (defendant).

¶9

Bank’s case is that on 03.08.2015, it had granted a loan of ₹15.00Lacs to the 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 @12.15% per annum with half-yearly rests. On 03.04.2023, a sum of ₹23,26,258/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶10

¶11

On 25.05.2023, summons was sent to the defendant by registered post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 01.07.2024, he proceeded was ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Jitandra Pal Singh, Authorised 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 ₹15.00Lacs and on 03.04.2023, a sum of ₹23,26,258/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹23,26,258/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Eight Only) with interest @12.15% per annum with half-yearly rests from 18.04.2023, 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. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 23.06.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged property(ies) 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. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 19.05.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh (Law Researcher)

State Bank of India v. Sh. Veer Sukhwant Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sh. Veer Sukhwant 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

State Bank of India versus Sri Subir Chatterjee

State Bank of India versus Sri Ganesh Barman

Ms Khan Brothers Ginning and Pressing Through its Authorized Signatory Mr. Ejas Khan Yunus Khan versus State Bank of India

Prabhjit Singh versus Hindu Cooperative Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M S Advance Associate

Harinder Singh versus Punjab and Sind Bank