State Bank Of Inida vs Rakesh on 14 November, 2025
7.6 Furthermore, though defendant has claimed that he
was not served with the notice of pre-institution mediation in
his written statement, however, it is clear from his affidavit of
admission denial of documents that he has admitted the
correctness of the contents of the non starter report Ex.PW1/7
wherein it has been clearly mentioned that defendant did not
join the pre-institution mediation proceeding despite service of
the notice upon him. Thus, it is clear that after plaintiff had
declared the subject loan as NPA, it had not only demanded the
outstanding loan amount through the aforesaid legal notice but
in order to proceed further for recovery of the said amount,
they had also undertaken the pre-institution mediation
proceedings and therefore, after service of the notice of the
same, defendant would have come to know that plaintiff bank
has already declared this loan account as NPA and in case,
plaintiff bank would have wrongly declared his loan account as
NPA then defendant had another opportunity at his end to put
his defence forth by joining the pre-institution mediation
proceedings, however, defendant willingly did not join the pre-
institution mediation proceedings. The entire conduct of the
CS(Comm)/424/2025 State Bank of India Vs. Sh. Rakesh Page no. 14 of 17
defendant discussed above clearly shows that plaintiff bank had
not only issued reminders for repayment of the outstanding
installments but they had also declared the subject loan account
as NPA as per the settled norms and agreed terms and
conditions of the loan agreement otherwise defendant would
have not only replied to the demand notice but he would have
also joined the pre-institution mediation proceedings to show
that the same were initiated without any cause of action but it is
clear that defendant did not do the needful and remained
completely dormant despite the demand raised by the plaintiff
bank.