STATE BANK OF INDIA vs SHANKER BATHLA on 30 September 2026

**FINAL ORDER**

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 26.05.2022 under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.33,10,518/- (Rupees Thirty Three lacs Ten thousand Five hundred Eighteen only) as on 19.04.2022 together with sd- pendentelite and future interest @15.00% per annum with monthly rest from 20.04.2022 along with costs.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant No.1, the applicant bank sanctioned Housing Loan facility for a sum of Rs.36,40,000/- @8.55% rate of interest per annum on 15.01.2019 to be repayable in 300 monthly installments of Rs.31,325/- for purchasing Flat no.1102, 11^th Floor, Tower-H, Bhiwadi, Alwar Rajasthan-301019 to be developed and constructed by defendant no.2 as per Agreement for Sell dated 11.10.2018. In case of delay or default in repayment of interest and installment, the defendants agreed to pay @2% penal interest.

3. That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 submitted loan application dated 12.12.2018 along with Agreement for Sell dated 11.10.2018 and executed Appraisal, Sanction Report, Letter of Arrangement, Deed of Undertaking, Agreement to Mortgage, Tripartite Agreement dated 15.01.2019 with defendant no.1 to 3 in favour of applicant bank.

4. That in order to secure the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 executed Memorandum of Loan Agreement for Home Loan to Public in respect of Flat no.1102, 11^th Floor, Tower-H, Bhiwadi, Alwar Rajasthan-301019 as per permission to mortgage issued by defendant no.2 and 3 towards the applicant bank on 15.01.2019.

5. As per Tripartite Agreement dated 15.01.2019, defendant no.2 & 3 issued No Objection for mortgaging said flat by marking lien and in case of default by defendants no.1, the applicant bank have right to cancel the booking and defendant Sd- no.2 & 3 shall refund the entire money so received by it from defendant no.1 to the applicant bank.

6. As per tripartite agreement dated 15.01.2019, the defendant no.2 agreed to deliver complete flat but no construction was commenced which was in complete breach of agreement.

7. It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite several requests and reminders. The defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly interest or installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as irregular and classified as NPA on 21.04.2021 and issued legal notice on 30.04.2022 by invoking the agreements but defendants neglected to clear the overdue amount / cancel the booking and return the money, hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of its dues.

8. Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 15.09.2026, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed on behalf of the defendants.

9. In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Harish Kumar Sablok, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Housing Loan Application WITH Documents, Appraisal & Sanction Report, Letter of Arrangement, Memorandum of Loan Agreement, Deed of Undertaking, Agreement to Mortgage, Tripartite Agreement, Sd- Agreement for Sell, Letter of Invocation, Legal Notice along with Postal Receipts, Statement of Account Certified under Bankers' Books of Evidence Act marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/111.

10. The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

11. The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

12. As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

10. In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.33,10,518/- (Rupees Thirty Three lacs Ten thousand *sd-*

Five hundred Eighteen only) as on 19.04.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @12.00% per annum with monthly rest from 20.4.2022 till the date of realization and costs, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged Flat no.1102, 11^th Floor, Tower-H, Bhiwadi, Alwar Rajasthan-301019. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 30.11.2026.

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

**(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA)** **PRESIDING OFFICER** **DRT-I, DELHI**

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 30.09.2026