Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Freshway Laundry and Another

DRT28 Oct 2025OA/446/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against M/s Freshway Laundry for recovery of Rs. 41.49 Lakhs. The Tribunal reduced the claimed interest from 12.15% to 8% per annum following the filing of the case.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 41,49,563 plus simple interest at 8% per annum; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to execute through sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

State Bank of India versus M/S Freshway Laundry and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.446/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 10.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 28.10.2025

¶6

State Bank of India, a Body Corporate Constituted Under The State Bank Of India Act, 1955, and having its Corporate Office At Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point Mumbai And One Of Its Local Head Office At Sector -17 Chandigarh And One Of Its Specialized Recovery Branch, SMECC, State Bank Of India, Administrative Building, Sector-68, Mohali, through its Chief Manager Sh. Sanjay Kaushik.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Freshway Laundry, Khasra No. 43/4, Gazipur, Dhakauli, Zirakpur, Through its Prop Smt. Sunitа

¶10

Smt. Sunita Wife of Sh. Shelender Singh, Prop. of M/S Freshway Laundry, Resident of House No. 3246, Sector 23 D, Chandigarh Second Address: Smt. Sunita Wife of Sh. Shelender Singh, Prop. of M/S Freshway Laundry, House No. B-1/51, DLF Valley, Panchkula

¶11

Third Adress: - Ms Sunita Wife of Sh. Shelender Singh, Prop. of M/S Freshway Laundry, Gali No.6, Eishi Nagar, Dhand Road, Kaithal .

¶12

………Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Present: Ms. Seerat Sharma, Advocate proxy for Sh. Swapan K Garg, Advocate for the applicant

¶15

Defendants already ex-parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.41,49,563.00p (Rupees Forty One Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Three Only). The

¶18

2 OA NO.446/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS M/S FRESHWAY LAUNDRY AND ANOTHER

¶19

Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sanjay Kaushik, Chief Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application in the terms of Gazette Notification dated 27.03.1987 and 31.08.2005, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 had approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs.45.00 Lacs & Cash Credit Limit of Rs.5.00 Lacs vide Loan Applications dated 16.11.2023, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs.42.00 Lacs & Cash Credit Limit of Rs.4.75 Lacs vide Letter of arrangement dated 02.12.2023, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. The defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 hypothecated stock, book debts, receivables etc. and machinery created out of bank finance, vide agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 02.12.2023, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Documents executed :- Legal notice dated 05.11.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA and Statement of accounts, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶22

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.41,49,563.00p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice but defendants 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 22.10.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sanjay Kaushik, Authorized Officer, State Bank of India, has been filed.

¶23

3 OA NO.446/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS M/S FRESHWAY LAUNDRY AND ANOTHER

¶24

Matter was listed for ex-parte arguments on 24.10.2025 wherein the learned proxy counsel for applicant prayed for adjournment. The prayer was declined as there was no ground to adjourn. Perused record.

¶25

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A6 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.41,49,563.00p (Rupees Forty One Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Three 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.

¶26

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.15%p.a. with 2% penal interest in both the accounts with monthly rests from 15.02.2025 till the realization.

¶27

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 loans 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 both 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.

¶28

4 OA NO.446/2025 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS M/S FRESHWAY LAUNDRY AND ANOTHER

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.41,49,563.00p (Rupees Forty One Lacs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Three 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 .

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 07.11.2025. 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: 28.10.2025

¶32

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. M/S Freshway Laundry and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Freshway Laundry 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

Bank of India versus M/S Radhika Enterprises and Another

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Sunil Kumar Yadav

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jatinder Gupta and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Mohan Lal and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Hardeep Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain and Another