Bhaskar International Private Limited v. State Bank of India & - Loan Facilities - Approach Of Banks
Banking - Loan Sanctioning - Banks in general, including SBI is casual in granting loans of huge amounts to bigger entities but at the same time, very demanding apropos small loans where ordinary people come for personal requirement(s), yet subjecting them to more stringent conditions and a tedious process, which may amount to, in certain cases, borderline harassment. We are in no way suggesting easing of norms and requirements for loan facilities, which is best left to the Reserve Bank of India and the bank(s) concerned but the procedure so adopted can certainly be made easier and fairer for loan-seekers/applicants and thereafter at the stage of recovery also. Further, with regard to concessions/incentives, the policy needs to be suitably framed/graded so as to give the maximum benefit to the persons who are at lowest rung of the social/financial strata. (Para 7)
Case Info
Case name:M/s Bhaskar International Private Limited & Ors. v. State Bank of India & Ors. CWP-987-2025
Coram:Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin AmanullahHon’ble Mr. Justice R. Mahadevan
Judgment / Order date:19-05-2026
Case laws and citations mentioned
- High Court judgment being challenged:
- State Bank of India v. State of Haryana and Others, CWP-987-2025, decided on 16.01.2025
- Neutral citation noted in the order: “2025:PHHC:005416-DB”
No other reported Supreme Court or High Court case law is cited within this order text.
Statutes / laws referred
- Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002
- Commonly called the SARFAESI Act, 2002
- Specifically, Section 14 (application to the District Magistrate for assistance in taking possession of secured assets).
- Reference to forums created under debt recovery laws:
- Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chandigarh (DRT)
- Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) (mentioned generically as “Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal”).
Three-sentence brief summary
The petitioners, who had taken a loan of Rs. 8.09 crores from SBI in 2019 and then defaulted without paying even a single instalment, challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order directing implementation of the District Magistrate’s order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for taking possession of their secured properties. The Supreme Court found the petitioners’ conduct seriously wanting and held that their offer to repay only the principal amount after about six years was “too little too late”, while also recording displeasure at SBI’s laxity in sanctioning such a large loan without proper assessment and at the broader tendency of banks to be casual with big loans but stringent with small borrowers. Declining to interfere, the Court dismissed the SLP but, as an extraordinary indulgence, directed that status quo over the properties be maintained for two weeks (till 02.06.2026) to allow the petitioners to pursue interim relief before the DRT, clarifying that this order would not aid them on merits nor prejudice SBI’s case.