The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against a defendant for recovery of a credit facility and costs.
Recovery of Rs.23,21,522/- with further interest at 7.20% p.a. and costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I ATHYDERABAD DATED THrS THE tSrH DAy oF NOVEMBER, 2022
PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESTDING OFFICER OA.No.129 ot 2022
Between:
State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2no floor, TSRTC commuter amenity centre, Bus terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Represented by its Chief Manager
Applicant
VERSUS
Sri Y. Siva Shankar Reddy, S/o Y. Narayana Reddy, H.No.L/ 724, Sy.No.44/3, Nagalakatta street, Veparala Village, Mylavarammandal, YSR Kadapa dist- 516 439.
Defendant
Counsel for theparties:
For the Applicant
For the Defendant
Sri C. Prabhakar
Exparte
ORDER
filed the present OA against Defendants for of Rs.23,21,522/- (Rupees Twenty three thousand Five hundred and twenty two @ 7.20o/o p.awith monthly rests from
(OA.no.t29/zO2Zl
date of application tiil the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.
2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant availed home loan of Rs.25,60,000/_ for construction of house through arrangement retter dated 24.Lo.20rg. To secure due repayment of said roan, the defendant executed memorandum of loan agreement and created equitable mortgage on 24.L0.20t8 by way of deposit of setuement deed no.103/2018 dated 12.01.2018 in respect of OA schedule property. After availing the loan facility, the defendant faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NPA and issued regar notice dated L6.04,2022. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding, Hence this OA.
- Applicant Bank.
(oA.no.129/2022)
3
(oA.no.129/2022)
iii) The Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the OA.
(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by_her. corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 15th day of Nov., 202:)
sdl-
(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFTCER
li:p
*
15 figlu wn
,f- t,rrt ..,
n*rffi,
,-ii:,i,tr{:il;Iocz/ c1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled to the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?
State Bank of India
GUMMADI GOPICHAND
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
