Partly allowed

Smt Vijayalakshmi L Kotecha and Ors. v. State Bank of India

DRT14 Jan 2026SA/22/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.A. No.22 of 2026, the court accepted the applicant's offer to deposit 10% of the outstanding amount and settle the loan account by March 31, 2026. The order deferred possession to January 16, 2026, subject to failure of the applicant to comply with the conditions.

What did the court decide?

Possession deferred to January 16, 2026, contingent upon the applicant making a 10% deposit by 5 p.m. on January 14, 2026 and approaching the bank for settlement within 15 days, with possession to be

Smt Vijayalakshmi L Kotecha and Ors. versus State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

14.01.2026	Exh.	*Roznama-MDRT-II* *S.A. No.22 of 2026*	Next date
		Mr Shivam P. Singh, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms Merlyn Vasudeo Monteiro, Advocate for Respondent.
	9	During the course of arguments, Ld. Advocate for the Applicant submits that there is possibility for an amicable settlement and are ready and willing to settle the matter through negotiations. Accordingly, Ld. Advocate filed pursis (exhibit-9) stating that the Applicants are ready to deposit 10% of the outstanding amount i.e., Rs.2,50,000/- today itself i.e. 14.01.2026 by 5 p.m., to show their Bonafide and will approach the Respondent for settlement and settle the matter on or before 31.03.2026. So, in view of pursis filed above, possession fixed for 16.01.2026 be deferred subject to condition mentioned in pursis (exhibit-9) failing which the Applicant shall handover the physical vacant possession of the subject property to the Respondent and the Respondent would be at liberty to take

¶2

Page 1 of 2

¶3

nrb - 01	appropriate measures under the SARFAESI Act. The Applicant shall approach the Respondent Bank within 15 days from today to settle and close the loan account on or before 31.03.2026 and the Respondent Bank is also expected to deal with the matter with positive attitude. In view of above, nothing remains in the I.A. as well as the S.A. Hence, I.A. No.110 of 2026 and S.A. No.22 of 2026 stands disposed of accordingly. File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. Sd/- P.O. DRT-II	Closed

¶4

Page 2 of 2

Smt Vijayalakshmi L Kotecha and Ors. v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Vijayalakshmi L Kotecha and Ors. v. State Bank of India

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

Mr Subhash Dayashankar Kushwaha versus State Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus Shaheen Mansuri

Maghvijay Jain versus Punjab National Bank

Sai Architectural Systems Pvt. Ltd. versus Saraswat Cooperative Bank Limited

Ramchandra Sadigale versus Fullerton India Home Finance Company Limited

Hdfc Bank versus One Capital Ltd.