Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

DRT22 Sept 2025OA/107/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Proceeding ex-parte, the Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant's claim for recovery of a loan amount of Rs.35,08,299.00p. The Tribunal fixed a uniform simple interest rate of 8% p.a. from the date of filing and ordered the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.35,08,299.00p jointly and severally with costs and future simple interest @8.00%p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S New Dashmesh Agro… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.107/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 24.01.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.09.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the state bank of India Act, 1955 and having Central office at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head office at Sector-17-A, Chandigarh and one of its branch at Jakhepal, Tehsil Sunam District Sangrur Punjab through its branch manager Sh. Sandeep Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. M/s New Dashmesh Agro Industries, situated at Near Water Works, Village Hambalwas, PO Jakhewal, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, Punjab through its proprietor Smt. Amandeep Kaur W/o Sh. Narinder Singh R/o Near Government High School, Village Hambalwas, Jakhewal, Tehsil Sunam District Sangrur Punjab.

¶10

Smt. Amandeep Kaur W/o Sh. Narinder Singh R/o Near Government High School, Village Hambalwas, Jakhewal, Tehsil Sunam District Sangrur Punjab.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by, Sh. Rishab Gupta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gaurav Singla, advocate for Applicant (through VC)

¶14

Defendants already ex parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.35,08,299.00p (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Eight Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Nine only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Branch Manager, o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in terms the Gazette Notification published in Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987 issued under

¶17

2 OA/107/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS NEW DASHMESH AGRO INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

¶18

regulations no.76 & 77 of State Bank of India General Regulations framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub section 3 of Section 50 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 with the precious sanction of the Central Government.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 had approached the applicant for the grant of CC of Rs.12.50 Lacs & Term Loan of Rs.15.40 Lacs vide Loan application dated 21.09.2022, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the CC Limit of Rs.12.50 Lacs & Term Loan of Rs.15.40 Lacs vide Letter of arrangement dated 23.09.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 had hypothecated its moveable assets i.e. all stocks & receivable and all current assets created from bank finance, both presented and future, Goyal Oil Expeller machinery having duty double reduction with round kettle ball and roller bearings fitted along with oil filter press 18X18 of 18 Plates with pump, vide Agreement of loan cum Hypothecation dated 23.09.2022 which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Invoice of machinery dated 03.10.2022 is Annexure A4 to this OA. Documents executed: Legal notice dated 27.09.2023 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A5 to this OA and Statement of accounts along with Calculation sheet & Banker’s Certificate, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA.

¶20

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.35,08,299.00p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 28.07.2025.

¶21

3 OA/107/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS NEW DASHMESH AGRO INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

¶22

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sandeep Kumar, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, h as been filed.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned proxy counsel (through Video Conferencing) that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A7 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.35,08,299.00p (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Eight Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Nine only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶25

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed [email protected]%p.a. with 2% penal interest in CC & [email protected]%p.a. with 2% penal interest in Term Loan, with Monthly rests from 18.01.2025 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 mortgaged property/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, 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 uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA

¶27

4 OA/107/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS NEW DASHMESH AGRO INDUSTRIES AND ANOTHER

¶28

till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.35,08,299.00p (Rupees Thirty Five Lacs Eight Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Nine only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts 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 assets of the defendants 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 defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶30

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 14.10.2025. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants 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: 22.09.2025 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Amarjit Singh and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Rajwant Kaur and Another

Indian Bank versus Sh. Mandeep

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Resham Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Neeru Khosla

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Sukhjinder Singh and Others