Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs M/S ABDUL REHMAN WANI on 23 September 2026
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER
TA No: 155/2023
Date of Institution: 26.02.2021
Date of Decision: 23.09.2026
SBI having its branches all over India and a Branch at Srinagar and Showkat, Ahmed Kangoo, Manager, SBI SARB, M.A. Road, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir.
……..Applicant
Vs.
M/s Abdul Rehman Wani through its Partners:-
1. Abdul Ahad Wani
2. Ghulam Mohammad Wani
3. Bashir Ahmed Wani
4. Mohammad Ashraf Wani
All sons of Late Abdul Rehman Wani
5. Mst. Sitara
6. Mst. Rukhsana
Daughters of Late Abdul Rehman Wani.
7. Mst Saja w/o Late Abdul Rehman Wani
All residents of: Wanabal Walapora, Tehsil South District Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir.
……….Defendants
Advocates
Ms. Lovedeep Kaur proxy counsel for Ms. Puja Sharma, Counsel for the applicant bank.
None for Defendants.
TA for the Recovery of ₹3,16,30,247/- with interest @12.85% per annum with monthly rests from 26.02.2021.
ORDER
1. On 26.02.2021, SBI filed the suit for the recovery of ₹3,16,30,247/- with interest against M/s Abdul Rehman Wani and others (defendants) in the Civil Court Srinagar. However, vide order dated 06.12.2022, this suit was transferred by the Court of Additional District Judge, (Bank Cases), Srinagar to DRT-I, Chandigarh.
Page 1 of 3
2. M/s Abdul Rehman Wani is a partnership firm and Defendant nos. 1 to 4 are its partners. Bank’s case is that on 23.02.2017, it had granted C.C. Limit of ₹300.00 Lacs; WCDL of ₹40.00 Lacs; Bank Guarantee (B.G.) of ₹100.00 Lacs, totaling to ₹440.00 Lacs to the firm through its partners defendant Nos.1 to 4 for business purpose. To secure all the loan facilities, Defendant Nos.1 to 7 had mortgaged their property (fully detailed in para No.3 of the application). Defendant Nos.1 to 7 stood as guarantors for all the loan facilities vide guarantee agreement dated 23.02.2017. The limit was renewed again on 04.09.2018. All the loan facilities were chargeable at different rates of interest. At the time of filing of the application, a sum of ₹3,16,30,247/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, the suit.
3. The Civil Court sent summonses to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. After transfer, summonses were sent to the defendants. Service of the defendants was completed on 21.11.2023. nobody had appeared on behalf of the defendants today.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Showkat, Ahmed Kangoo, Manager, along with the loan and security documents.
5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the total loan of ₹440.00 Lacs (C.C. Limit of ₹300.00 Lacs; WCDL of ₹40.00 Lacs; Bank Guarantee (B.G.) of ₹100.00 Lacs) and at the time of filing of the application, a sum of ₹3,16,30,247/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the case of the bank for the recovery of ₹3,16,30,247/- (Rupees Three Crores Sixteen Lacs Thirty Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven Only) with interest @12.85% per annum with
Page 2 of 3
monthly rests from 26.02.2021, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3 of the property as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 24.10.2026.
10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.
Pronounced in the open court.
(A S Narang) Dated: 23.09.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…