The Debt Recovery Tribunal dismissed an appeal against an Authorized Officer of SBI in a SARFAESI matter where the applicant admitted the bank complied with statutory requirements and no repayment was made. The application was dismissed without merits despite a default of settlement payment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
SA/254/2025 M/S HI TECH CONSTRUCTIONS AND ANOTHER Vs AUTHORIZED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA
27.11.2025 Item No.8
Present: Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Counsel for the Applicants. Mr. Vivek Verma, Counsel for respondent bank.
M/s Hi Tech Constructions and another (Applicants) have filed this Securitization Application under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), against the Authorized Officer, SBI (Respondent).
Admittedly, SBI had sanctioned some credit facilities to the applicants. In the year 2013, applicant was sanctioned C.C. Limit of Rs.1.10 Crores and on 14.01.2013 Term loan of Rs.15.00 Lacs. Earlier on 14.08.2010, bank had sanctioned Term loan of Rs.30.00 Lacs. All the accounts turned NPA on 19.09.2016. On 12.01.2024, the A.O. issued the notice under Section 13(2) demanding a sum of Rs.3,90,75,369.69p. Applicant did not make the repayment and on 22.05.2024, the bank issued the notice under Section 13(4). Again there was no payment. On 24.01.2025, bank obtained the DM order. However, the possession was not taken. On 11.09.2025, applicant filed the present SA on the basis of notice of the Tehsildar dated 05.09.2025. On 29.09.2025, counsel for the applicant had made a statement that they would pay the whole of the settled amount by 30.10.2025 and in case, they failed to make the payment by 30.10.2025 they would surrender the possession on 30.10.2025. However, the payment was not made and the possession was also not delivered.
Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, counsel for the applicant admits that the bank has complied with all the requirements of the SARFAESI action. In view of this, I am of the considered view, that there is no merit in the SA and the same is hereby dismissed .
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
PANKAJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the secturitization application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act has any merit given the bank's compliance
M/s Hi Tech Constructions etc.
Authorized Officer, State Bank of India
(A S Narang)
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
