Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
M/s ASHOK TRADING vs STATE BANK OF INDIA on 12 September 2025
DRT.PATNA
RA04 of2024 (0)
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna
PresidingOfficer: Shri KaushalendraYadav R.A. CaseNo. 04 of 2024
[Arisingoutof OACaseno.: 453 of 2019)
1. Mis Ashok Trading through Shri Ashok Kumar Jha (proprietor), son of Late Chandra Kant Jha, residing at Agricultural Market Yard, Gulabbagh, District - Purnea - 854326.
2. Smt. Ranjana
Jha
(Guarantor), Wlo -
Shri Ashok Kumar Jha,
residing at Agricultural Market Yard, Gulabbagh, District - Pumea _
854326.
...... Applicants
Vs
1. State Bank of India, Stress Assets Recovery Branch (SARB),at 2nd Floor, Patna Main Branch Building, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna _
800001.
....Respondent
Present:
Forthe Applicant
Forthe Respondent
Sh.Ajit KumarSinha,Advocate
None
Dated: 12.09.2025
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This Review Application u/r 5A of Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedures) Rules, 1993 has been filed by the applicant on 22.02.2024 to review the judgment/order dated 11.01.2024 passed in the OA no.453/2019 by this Tribunal.
DRT,PATNA RA04of 2024[a]
2. Along with the review application, the applicant has also filed a Limitation Petition by way of IA 170/2024 for condonation of delay in filing instant ReviewApplication.
3. On the point of limitation it is submitted that in this matter judgment has been pronounced on 11.01.2024 but the True & Freecopy of the said judgment was prepared on 23.01.2024 and the same was received by the applicants on 09.02.2024. Accordingly, the applicant filed a present RA within the limitation period from the date of preparation of true & free of judgments.
4. On the point of merit it is submitted that the respondent bank is not entitled for any interest during pendency of O.A. and for future till actual payment with contractual interest asthe bank did not mention the pendente-lite and future interest rate while claiming from the borrower.
5. Considered the contentions of applicants and perused the case records.
6. The present ReviewApplication has been filed by the applicant under rule 5-A of the Debts RecoveryTribunal [Procedures) Rules1993.The rule 5-A reads asunder- "[1] Any party considering itself aggrieved by an order made by the Tribunal on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the records desires to obtain a review of the order made against him, may apply for a review of the order to the Tribunal which had made the order. [2] NO'application for review shall be made after the expiry of a period of thirty days from the date of the order and no such application shall be entertained unless it is accompanied by an affidavit verifying the application. [3] Where it appears to the Tribunal that there is no sufficient ground for a review, it shall reject the application [but where the Tribunal is grant the same." of opinion that the application] for review shall be granted, it shall !7; ,.b .j\.o._., '\ f-
DRT,PATNA RA 04 of 2024 [OJ 7, This review petition is mainly on the ground of non-appreciation of the pleadings, facts and evidence and the law which is beyond the scope of inquiry under Rule SA. The phrase "mistake or error apparent on the face of record" can't be construed as de-novo re- appreciation of facts and evidence.
8. In my opinion, the grounds as mentioned in the Review petition, relate to appreciation of facts, evidence and the law. The scope of enquiry under the review application is not extended to revisit or de novo appraisal of evidence. Neither this application discloses any arithmetical, clerical error apparent on the face of record, nor it has been pointed out during the course of arguments. As such this petition for review is not legally maintainable and dismissed accordingly. Order signed, sealed,dated and pronounced in the open court on this 12thDayof September, 202S. Dictated & corrected by me. -7/ \ -I\rA.\h [Kaushalendra Yadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna