Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals

STATE BANK OF INDIA vs M/S MIRZA INTERNATIONAL on 20 December 2025

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi

4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building,

Parliament Street, New Delhi

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma T.A. No.1201 of 2023

State Bank of India

Stressed Asset Recovery Bra nch(SARB)

23, First Floor, Najafgarh Road

New Delhi-110015

Versus

1. M/s Mirza International

Through its Proprietor Sh. Mirza Ansari

R-171A, Gali No.7

Ramesh Park, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-92

Applicant

Defendant

Date of Reserve: 09.12.2025

Date of Pronouncement: 20.12.2025

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

FINAL ORDER

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank before DRT-II, Delhi on 02.08.2022 and then transferred to DRT-I Delhi under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.32,48,319.23 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Forty Eight Thousand Three Hundred Nineteen and paisa Twenty Three only) as on 31.07.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest @11.05% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of realization along with costs. gce—

2. The brief facts of the case are that on the request of the defendant through its proprietor Md.Mirza Ansari submitted loan application dated 25.09.2020 along with self-attested copies of PAN Card, Aadhar Card, GST Registration Certificate, and licence etc., the applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility of Rs.30,00,000/- @3.5% above MCLR with monthly rest on 01.10.2020 against hypothecation of stocks and book debts covered under CGTMSE scheme. The defendant agreed to pay penal interest @2% in case of account become irregular, overdue and sticky.

3. In order to avail the loan facility, the defendant submitted loan application and executed Letter of Arrangement, Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation, Annexure-I and Undertaking with the applicant bank on 01.10.2020.

4. It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and failed to route their transactions through the account with the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.05.2022 as per RBI guidelines and issued demand notice dated 20.07.2022 but the defendant failed to regularize the account. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

5. Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite of proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 02.05.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal and even written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have not been filed by the defendant.

6. In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh.Anil Kumar Arya, authorized representative of the applicant bank, who has proved the documents such as Gazette Notification, Loan Application and Asset & Liabilities Statement, Letter of Arrangement, Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation, Annexure-I, Undertaking, Demand Notice along with Postal Receipts, Certified Statement of Accounts under Section 2A of Bankers' Book of Evidence Act marked as Ex.AW-1/1 to Ex.AW-1/8.

7. 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 approved.

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

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

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.32,48,319.23 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Forty Eight Thousand Three Hundred Nineteen and paisa Twenty Three ca- only) as on 31.07.2022 together with pendentelite and future interest @11.05% per annum from 01.08.2022 till the date of realization and costs; failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of hypothecated stock, book debts etc. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendant. (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 18.02.2026. (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: 20.12.2025 4

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead