Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Nawab Resturant and Another

DRT29 Apr 2026OA/434/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India to recover Rs. 20.92 lakhs from M/s Nawab Restaurant and proprietor Sher Singh. The court ordered recovery with simple interest at 8% p.a. and directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 20,92,120 with simple interest at 8% p.a. from filing date; order to issue Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce through sale of assets.

State Bank of India versus M/S Nawab Resturant and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.434/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.03.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 29.04.2026

¶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 Offices, at Sector 17A, Chandigarh and Branches all over India, including one of its Branches, at SBI, AMCC MUKTSAR, District Sri Muktsar Sahib through its Manager, Sh. Kuldeep Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Nawab Restaurant through Prop. Sh. Sher Singh, Central Plaza C1, Dr. Kehar Singh Marg, Bye Pass Muktsar, Muktsar, (Pb.) 152026.

¶10

Sh. Sher Singh son of Sh. Sukhdev Singh resident of Madrasa, PО: Madrasa, Distt. Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab. 152026

¶11

.……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Ms. Sonal Chabra, Advocate for the applicant

¶14

None for Defendants (already ex parte vide order dated 23.04.2026)

¶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.20,92,120.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Ninety Two Thousand One Hundred Twenty Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Kuldeep Kuma r, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide

¶17

Gazette notification, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1, through its proprietor defendant no.2, approached the applicant for the grant of

¶19

2 OA/434/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS NAWAB RESTURANT AND ANOTHER

¶20

Term Loan of Rs.19.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 06.04.2024 which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.19.00 Lacs vide Letter of Arrangement dated 09.05.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants hypothecated their all stock and assets purchased out of bank finance vide Agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 09.05.2024, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Documents executed: Copies of bills of purchased items dated 04.09.2024, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 16.01.2026, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Statement of account, with certificate, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶22

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account, there was a debit of Rs.20,92,120.00, 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 summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 23.04.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Kuldeep Kumar , Manager, State Bank of India, h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned 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 A7 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility, which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants failed

¶23

3 OA/434/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS NAWAB RESTURANT AND ANOTHER

¶24

to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.20,92,120.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Ninety Two Thousand One Hundred Twenty 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 pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant has claimed interest @11.15%p.a. along with 2% penal interest with monthly rests from 29.01.2026 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 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 simple interest @8.00% p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.20,92,120.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Ninety Two Thousand One Hundred Twenty Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in the loan account 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

¶28

4 OA/434/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS NAWAB RESTURANT AND ANOTHER

¶29

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.

¶32

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 18.05.2026

¶33

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 .

¶34

Dated: 29.04.2026

¶35

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

State Bank of India v. M/S Nawab Resturant and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Nawab Resturant 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

Canara Bank versus Sh. Ashwani Jindal and Others

Union Bank of India versus Ms Shree Shyam Enterprises and Another

State Bank of India versus Smt. Sarita Vohra and Others

Canara Bank versus Sh. Satbir Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Pargat Singh

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Lakhvir Singh