Allowed

State Bank of India v. Ms Sai Dudh Sankalan Kendra

DRT24 Aug 2026OA/521/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of outstanding dues. The defendant appeared ex-parte. The court adjusted future interest to 11% per annum and directed the sale of hypothecated assets for realization.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 75,40,883/- plus future interest at 11% p.a.; direction to sell hypothecated assets and issue Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Ms Sai Dudh Sankalan… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 19.07.2025 Registered on: 26.08.2025 Decided on: 24.08.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 01 05

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 521/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 75,40,883/-

¶4

State Bank of India

¶5

(SME) Shrirampur Ahilyanagar, is a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India (SME) Shrirampur Ahilyanagar, Act, 1955 having a SME Branch, at Shrirampur, through its Manager, through Mr. Nilay Mahadeorao Sorte, Deputy Manager, SME Shrirampur Ahilyanagar, Age: 52 years, Occ.: Service, R/o.: Aurangabad.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Sai Dudh Sankalan Kendra, Through. Prop. Ravindra Rajendra Balme, Age: Major, Occupation: Business, R/o.: 175/1, Near Vadner Society Building Vadnergaon, Tal. Shrirampur, Dist. Ahilyanagar 416109. AND R/o.: Kangahar Khurd, Balme Wasti, Tal. Rahuri, Dist. Ahilyanagar.

(OA No.521/2025)

Page 1 of 6

[AMBADAS]

And

Balme Wasti Vadnergaon, Tq. Rahuri, Dist. Ahilyangar.

¶14

…Defendant

¶15

APPEARANCES For the Applicant For Defendant

¶16

Mr. A.L. Muley Advocate Ex-parte

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Delivered on 24.08.2026

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 75,40,883 /- (Rupees Seventy Five Lacs, Forty Thousand, Eight Hundred and Eighty Three only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 19.07.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendant.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶21

That, the Defendant had approached to the Applicant bank and requested to sanction Cash Credit Facility. Upon considering the request and need of the defendant, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 65,00,000/- vide arrangement letter

(OA No.521/2025)

Page 2 of 6

[AMBADAS]

dated 20.11.2023 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed

¶26

rate of interest for aforesaid loan facility was @ 13.40% p.a. with monthly rests. The defendant also agreed to pay an additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in case of default in repayment.

¶27

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank, including the sanction letter, hypothecation agreement, personal deed of guarantee, etc., in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶28

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the Term loan Facility, the Defendant executed hypothecation agreement thereby hypothecating stock, book debts and other current created out of bank finance.

¶29

The applicant bank contended that the defendant has failed to keep his promise and commitments agreed by him with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendant failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed

(OA No.521/2025)

Page 3 of 6

[AMBADAS]

rate of interest as per terms and conditions of the sanction letter. Thereafter, the applicant bank repeatedly made demand of loan amount and called upon the defendant to pay with the agreed rate of interest thereon, but the defendant failed and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendant became irregular and classified as NPA on 31.05.2025. Therefore, on 02.06.2025 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. The defendant failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶34

The defendant failed to appear in matter though he was duly served. Hence, the defendant was proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 25.02.2026.

¶35

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Nilay Mahadeorao Sorte, Authorized Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-10 as per list of documents Exh. 5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.521/2025)

Page 4 of 6

[AMBADAS]

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant Bank.

¶40

Since the defendant failed to appear and did not contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

¶41

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over hypothecated property.

¶42

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 13.40% per annum with monthly rests on the loan from the date of filing i.e. 19.07.2025 of this application till realization of the claim amount. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @ 11% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(A) Original Application No. 521/2025 is allowed with costs.

(OA No.521/2025)

Page 5 of 6

[AMBADAS]

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 75,40,883 /- (Rupees Seventy Five Lacs, Forty Thousand, Eight Hundred and Eighty Three only), along with future interest @ 11% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 19.07.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶49

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the hypothecation of stock, book debts and other current assets created out of bank finance vide documents at Exh. A-4 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶50

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the hypothecated assets/ articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶51

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶52

(F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendant.

¶53

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶54

Sd/Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.24.08.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶55

(OA No.521/2025)

¶56

Page 6 of 6

¶57

[AMBADAS]

State Bank of India v. Ms Sai Dudh Sankalan Kendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Ms Sai Dudh Sankalan Kendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus Sudhir Bhaurao Ghuge

Gulam Ali Khan Abdul Hameed Khan versus Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chetan Kachru Jagtap

Union Bank of India versus Ms Balaji Fertilizers

Union Bank of India versus Suman Somnath Sanap