Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Superb Industries a Proprietary Concern through Proprietor Shri Pankaj Narayanji Warfade

DRT19 Jan 2026OA/302/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of outstanding term loan, cash credit, and MC-WCTL-SBF dues against two respondents, adjusting penal interest and ordering the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

A decree for recovery of Rs. 14,15,049.14, Rs. 3,68,875.80, and Rs. 2,22,054 along with respective future interest was granted, and a Recovery Certificate was issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S Superb Industries a Proprietary… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Page 1 of 5 O.A. No. 302/2023

¶2

PRESENTED ON : 24.01.2023 REGISTERED ON : 12.05.2023

¶3

Exh. No. 16

¶4

BEFORE THE PO, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR

¶5

Delivered by Pankaj Kumar

¶6

O.A. No. 302/2023

¶7

State Bank of India

¶8

: Applicant

¶9

A corporation constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 5, Sai Complex, Bharat Nagar, Nagpur – 440033 Phone No. 0712-2567934 Acting through its one of the Principal Officer Chief Manager i.e. Shri Omprakash B. Kotangale having authority to file the original application which includes the authority to verify & sign the Original Application.

¶10

Versus

¶11

1. M/s Superb Industries

¶12

: Defendants

¶13

A proprietary concern, Acting through proprietor Shri Pankaj Narayanji Warfade, Plot No. D14/24, MIDC Umred, PO Umred, Umred, District : Nagpur – 441203

¶14

2. Shri Pankaj Narayanji Warfade

¶15

Occupation : Business

¶16

R/o. Plot No. D14/24, MIDC Umred, PO Umred, Umred, District : Nagpur – 441203

¶17

Page 2 of 5 O.A. No. 302/2023

¶18

Learned Counsel for Applicant	Adv. Anita Bhojwani
Defendants Set Exparte On	24.09.2024

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

(Delivered on 19^th Day of January, 2026)

¶21

This is an application filed by the applicant U/s 19 of RDB Act, 1993 against defendants for recovery of aggregate amount of Rs. 20,11,295/- with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization as under :

¶22

A. An amount of Rs. 14,16,877.14/- outstanding in Term Loan Account No. 38511493970 with costs and future interest @10% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization.

¶23

B. An amount of Rs. 3,68,875.80/- outstanding in Cash Credit Loan Account No. 38511577055 with costs and future interest @12.15% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization.

¶24

C. An amount of Rs. 2,25,543/- outstanding in MC-WCTL-SBF Loan Account No. 39786923719 with costs and future interest @8.40% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization.

¶25

Page 3 of 5 O.A. No. 302/2023

¶26

Though, defendant nos. 1 & 2 were duly served with the suit summons vide Exh. 9 & 10, they failed to cause appearance before this Tribunal to defend their case despite granting several adjournments. Hence, the proceeding against defendant nos. 1 & 2 was set exparte on 24.09.2024.

¶27

The applicant has filed its Claim Affidavit (Exh. 11 & 14) alongwith List of Documents (Exh. 12), annexing therewith 9 documents along with a pursis vide Exh. 15, stating therein that no penal interest has been applied in Cash Credit Loan Account No. 38511577055. The original documents therein are marked as Exh. AW1/1 to AW-1/9. It has been stated in the O.A. as well as in Claim Affidavit that penal interest of Rs. 1,828/- and Rs. 3,489/- has been applied in Term Loan Account No. 38511493970 and MC-WCTL-SBF Loan Account No. 39786923719 respectively.

¶28

Heard Learned counsel for the applicant.

¶29

On perusal of the case record, I find that there is no mention with regard to hypothecated property in the Schedule of O.A., neither it has been mentioned in the agreement of loan-cum-hypothecation in Exh. AW-1/2.

¶30

As stated supra, defendants remained exparte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz. Exh. AW -1/1 to AW-1/9 marked on behalf of the applicant, clinches the claim of the applicant against defendants. There is no reason to disbelieve the

¶31

Page 4 of 5 O.A. No. 302/2023

¶32

evidence adduced on behalf of applicant. Hence, defendants are liable to pay, jointly and severally, the claim of the applicant with costs and future interest. However, I am not inclined to allow penal interest of Rs. 1,828/- and Rs. 3,489/- applied in Term Loan Account No. 38511493970 and MC-WCTL-SBF Loan Account No. 39786923719 respectively.

¶33

Hence, it is ordered as under:-

¶34

ORDER

¶35

A] O.A. No. 302/2023 is allowed to the extent as under with costs.

¶36

B] Defendants to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank an amount of Rs. 14,15,049.14/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakh Fifteen Thousand Forty Nine and Paise Fourteen Only) outstanding in Term Loan Account No. 38511493970 with simple future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization.

¶37

C] Defendants to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank an amount of Rs. 3,68,875.80/- (Rupees Three Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Five and Paise Eighty Only) outstanding in Cash Credit Loan Account No. 38511577055 with simple future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization.

¶38

D] Defendants to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank an amount of Rs. 2,22,054/- (Rupees Two Lakh Twenty Two Thousand Fifty Four Only) outstanding in MC-WCTL-SBF Loan Account No.

¶39

Page 5 of 5 O.A. No. 302/2023

¶40

39786923719 with simple future interest @8.40% p.a. from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization.

¶41

E] It is declared that outstanding dues are secured by mortgaged immovable property of defendants as described in Schedule annexed to O.A. and as referred in Exh. AW-1/3. No charge is being kept on hypothecated goods on basis of Exh. AW-1/2, as discussed above.

¶42

F] Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶43

G] The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the parties to this O.A at once.

¶44

Nagpur (Pankaj Kumar) Presiding Officer Date: 19.01.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal Nagpur

State Bank of India v. M/S Superb Industries a Proprietary Concern through Proprietor Shri Pankaj Narayanji Warfade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Superb Industries a Proprietary Concern through Proprietor Shri Pankaj Narayanji Warfade

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 M/S Agro Food Beverages

Icici Bank Limited versus Jitender Kumar

Bank of Baroda versus Dharamveer Singh

Amrutha Foods versus Canara Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Passi (Since Deceased)

Indian Bank versus Sh. Harpal Singh