Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Ar Polyvin and Another

DRT22 Jun 2026OA/621/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 20.86 lakh from M/s AR Polyvin and Sh. Anil Kumar. The Tribunal decreed payment of principal with simple interest at 8% p.a. and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; respondents directed to pay Rs. 20,86,666 plus 8% p.a. interest from filing date until realization.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.621/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 24.04.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.06.2026

¶6

State Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under State Bank of India Act 1955 and having its Corporate Centre at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai and one of its Local Head Office, Sector 17-A Chandigarh, one of its Recovery Branch Stressed Assets Recovery Branch at Sheranwala Gate, Patiala, Punjab - 174001 through its Chief Manager & Principal Officer Sh. Mohit Jindal.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s AR Polyvin, a proprietorship firm having its business place at Dhobi Ghat, Nabha Gate, Patiala through its proprietor Sh. Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Rattan Chand.

¶10

Sh. Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Rattan Chand, R/o House No. 90/1, New Lal Bagh Colony, Patiala, Punjab-147001. IInd Address: H. No. 291/2, Jourian Bhatian, Patiala, Punjab -147001.

¶11

……..Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Tarlok Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Pancham Sharma, Advocate for the applicant

¶14

None for Defendants (Already ex-parte vide order dated 17.06.2026).

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.20,86,666.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Six Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mohit Jindal, Chief Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application in term of the Gazette Notifications dated 26.09.1959, 26.08.1972 & 27.03.1987 issued by Executive Committee

¶17

2 OA NO.621/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS M/S AR POLYVIN AND ANOTHER

¶18

of the Central Board of Directors of State Bank of India in exercises of the powers conferred on it under Regulations No. 76 and 77 of State Bank of India Regulations, vide Sub Section (3) of Section 50 of State Bank of India Act, 1955, with previous sanction of Central Government.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.35,00,000.00 vide Application for MSME Loan dated 28.02.2020, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for renewal of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.35,00,000.00 vide Application for MSME Loan dated 01.02.2021, which is Annexure A4 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for restructure of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.25,00,000.00 vide Application for MSME Loan dated 03.11.2023, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for restructure of Cash Credit Limit of Rs.20,00,000.00 vide Application for MSME Loan dated 09.09.2025, which is Annexure A7 to this OA.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit of Rs.35,00,000.00 vide Letter of Arrangement dated 03.03.2020, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, The applicant renewed the Cash Credit Limit of Rs.35,00,000.00 vide Letter of Arrangement dated 03.03.2020, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Thereafter, The applicant restructured the Cash Credit Limit of Rs.20,00,000.00 vide Letter of Arrangement dated 11.09.2025, which is Annexure A8 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2. 4. Defendant no. 1 through defendant no. 2 hypothecated its stocks vide Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation dated 03.03.2020, which is Annexure A3 to this OA. Documents executed : Revival Letters dated 14.11.2022, 04.12.2023, 01.04.2024, 11.09.2025, which are Annexure A9(Colly) to this OA; Legal Notice dated 31.01.2026, which is Annexure A10 to

¶21

3 OA NO.621/2026 STATE BANK OF INDIA VS M/S AR POLYVIN AND ANOTHER

¶22

this OA; Statement of account along with certificate, which is Annexure A11 to this OA.

¶23

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, there was a debit of Rs.20,86,666.00, 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.

¶24

The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal, but no one appeared on behalf of the defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 17.06.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mohit Jindal, Chief Manager, State bank of India has been filed.

¶25

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶26

From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A11 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 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 bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, loan account was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.20,86,666.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Six Only), along with interest from the defendants, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount. 10. In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50%p.a. with monthly rests from 31.01.2026 till the realization. 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

¶27

4 OA NO.621/2026

¶28

STATE BANK OF INDIA VS M/S AR POLYVIN AND ANOTHER

¶29

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 @08.00%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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.20,86,666.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Eighty Six Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Six Only), with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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 stocks of the defendant no. 1 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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 07.07.2026. 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: 22.06.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

State Bank of India v. M/S Ar Polyvin and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Ar Polyvin 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurnam Singh

Axis Bank Limited versus M/S a F Cloth House and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Narinder Pal Singh

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus M/S Shraman Strips Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Yes Bank Limited versus M/S Samrat Trading Co. and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Pawan Transport Company and Others