Allowed

State Bank of India v. Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others

DRT25 Jul 2025OA/33/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India against four respondents for recovery of ₹1.05 crore. The tribunal granted uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 1,05,81,768 with costs and simple interest @8% p.a. from filing date till realization via sale of properties.

State Bank of India versus Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.33/2024

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 05.11.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 25.07.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 and having Central Office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office at Sector 17-A, Chandigarh and one of its specialized branch known as SARB at SCO 15, 1^st Floor, Sector 7-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh 160009 through its Chief Manager Sh. Sanjeev Prakash Verma.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

BHJ Restro Private Limited through its Directors, 2^nd Floor, Unit no. S-22, S-23, S-24, S-25, S-26, S-27, S-28 Bestech Square Mall, Sector-66, Mohali, SAS Nagar, Punjab-160062.

¶10

Smt. Kuljeet Kaur W/o Sh. Hardarshan Singh Madan, Director BHJ Restro Private Limited, R/o House no. B-19, Shalimar Enclave, K-Area, Dhakauli, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab-160104.

¶11

Smt. Jasveen Kaur D/o Sh. Hardarshan Singh Madan, Director BHJ Restro Private Limited, R/o House no. 244-A, Sector-66, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab-160062.

¶12

Sh. Amardeep Singh S/o Sh. Hardarshan Singh, Director BHJ Restro Private Limited, R/o House no. B-19, Shalimar Enclave, K-Area, Dhakauli, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab-160104.

¶13

………. Defendants

¶14

Advocates:

¶15

Argued by Sh. Rishab Gupta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gaurav Singla, Advocate for the applicant

¶16

Defendants are ex parte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993,

¶19

¶20

OA NO. 33/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS BHJ RESTRO PVT LTD AND OTHERS

¶21

against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 1,05,81,768.00 (Rupees One Crore Five Lacs Eighty One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Eight Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sanjeev Prakash Verma, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in term of Gazette notification published in the Gazette of India dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 and 02.05.1987, under Regulation No. 76 read with 77 of State Bank of India General Regulation framed in exercise of the power conferred by Sub- section (3) of Section 50 of the State Bank of India, Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 through its Directors had approached the applicant for grant of CC Limit of Rs. 10.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 90.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 20.07.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. Further, the applicant offered for Working Capital Term Loan under GECL to the defendants vide Offer Letter dated 16.06.2020, which is Annexure A5 to this OA and this offer of Rs. 15.00 Lacs was accepted by the defendant no. 1 through its directors. Thereafter, again defendant no. 1 through Directors approached the applicant for grant of FITL Loan of Rs. 6.00 Lacs.

¶23

The applicant sanctioned CC Limit of Rs. 10.00 Lacs and Term Loan of Rs. 70.00 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 08.08.2019, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Further, the applicant sanctioned Working Capital Term Loan under GECL of Rs. 15.00 Lacs and FITL Loan of Rs. 6.00 Lacs vide Letters of Arrangement dated 04.07.2020 & 29.12.2020 which are Annexures A6 & A13 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶24

Defendant no. 2 had mortgaged her immovable property i.e. Land Measuring 00B-05B i.e. 250 Sq. Yards. Situated at Himmatgarh, Nagar Panchayat, Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali vide equitable

¶25

¶26

OA NO. 33/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS BHJ RESTRO PVT LTD AND OTHERS

¶27

mortgage of Sale deed along with its Translation bearing vasika no. 5515 dated 13.11.2006, which are Annexures A9 & A9A to this OA. The above property is now known as House no. 19 B, Shalimar Enclave, Dhakoli, Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar.

¶28

Documents executed:- Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation, Guarantee Agreement and Letter of confirmation for creation of mortgage, all dated 08.08.2019, which are Annexures A3, A4 & A10 to this OA; Supplemental Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation and Guarantee Agreement, both dated 04.07.2020, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA; Letter of confirmation for extension of mortgage by Deposit of Title deeds dated 04.08.2020, which is Annexure A11 to this OA; Bank circular on FITL dated 12.08.2020, which is Annexure A12 to this OA; Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation and Guarantee Agreement dated 29.12.2020, which are Annexures A14 & A15 to this OA; Balance confirmation letter dated 31.03.2022, which is Annexure A16 to this OA; Legal notice dated 28.10.2022, along with postal receipt, which is Annexure A17 to this OA and Statement of accounts which are Annexures A18 to A21 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs. 1,05,81,768.00, 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 23.07.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sanjeev Prakash Verma, Chief Manager, State Bank of India h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶29

¶30

OA NO. 33/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS BHJ RESTRO PVT LTD AND OTHERS

¶31

It was argued by learned proxy counsel 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 A21 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 bank. 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. 1,05,81,768.00 (Rupees One Crore Five Lacs Eighty One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Eight Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶32

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.65%p.a. in CC Limit, @10.65%p.a. in Term Loan, @09.25% in GECL facility and @17.25% in FITL facility with monthly rests from 19.09.2023 till the realization.

¶33

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, 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 @08.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶34

¶35

OA NO. 33/2024 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS BHJ RESTRO PVT LTD AND OTHERS

¶36

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs. 1,05,81,768.00 (Rupees One Crore Five Lacs Eighty One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Eight Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all 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/mortgaged properties 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.

¶37

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this

¶40

Tribunal on 03.09.2025.

¶41

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.

¶42

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶43

Dated: 25.07.2025

¶44

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶45

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others

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 Sh. Onkar Singh

Messrs Sohan Singh Daljit Singh and Others versus Punjab National Bank and Another

Jasmeet Singh versus Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

State Bank of India versus Sh. Navdeep Singh Sohal and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Heera Singh and Others