Allowed

State Bank of India v. Ms Akshara Digital

DRT22 Nov 2022OA/141/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India against M/s. Akshara Digital and Sri C. Prabhakar for recovery of outstanding loan dues along with interest and costs, permitting proceedings against hypothecated assets. (Note: Amount listed as Rs. 24,86,492 in text; order specifies Rs. 24,54,407).

What did the court decide?

Permission to proceed against hypothecated assets and personal properties of the defendants for debt realization; recovery of principal sum with future interest and costs.

State Bank of India versus Ms Akshara Digital — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22NDDAY OF NOVEMBER,2022

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.141 ol2022

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095.

¶7

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s. Akshara Digital,

¶11

Rep by its proprietor

¶12

Sri BachuGnanendra,

¶13

Plot no.56, Sarvodaya colony, Meerpet, Saroornagar

¶14

Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad - 97.

¶15

Also at

¶16

H.No.4-342, Sarvodaya colony, Near Saibaba temple, Meerpet, Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500 097.

¶17

Defendant

¶18

Sri C. Prabhakar Exparte

¶19

(oA.No.14112022)

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.24,86,492l- (Rupees Twenty four lakhs Eighty six thousand Four hundred and Ninety two only) i.e., a sum of Rs.24,54,467l- under loan account No.39960230295 with further interest @ 10.650/o p.a with monthly rests and a sum of Rs.32,025/- under loan account no.40050134005 with further interest @ 12.30o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated assets as described in the schedule to OA.

¶22

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant is a proprietary concern represented by its proprietor Sri BachuGnanendra availed cash credit loan of Rs.0.3g lakhs and term loan of Rs.22.42 lakhs totaling Rs.22.80 lakhs through letter of arrangement dated 18.01.2021. To secure due repayment of aforesaid loan, the defendant executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 18.01.2021. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence lhe^{applicantbank was constrainedto classify the account as NpA} ' ,, and issued legal notice on 05.05.2022. Inspite of several requests raldlt$f2p2Os,^{the defendant did not clear the outstanding.Hence} i,^., i,:j.^ |',' thisOA.

ii '*l'

' '..44

':--j-

(oA.No.14U2022)

Defendant was set exparte on 26.!0.2022.

¶28

Shri K. Govind Raju, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined

¶29

himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are

¶30

marked as Ex.A.1 to A.6.

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶32

6' The point that arise for consideration is whether the Appricant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶33

7' The defendant was cared absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.Al to A.6. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is entiued to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶34

!. '' "

¶35

1. Jn the resuiti.the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶36

(Rupees Twenty four lakhs Eighty six

¶37

(oA.No.141/2022)

¶38

thousand Four hundred and Ninety two onry) i.e., a sum of Rs.24,54,407/- under roan account No.39960 z3ozgs with further interest @ 10.650lo p.a and a sum of Rs.32, 025/_ under loan account no.40050134005 with further interest @ 12.30 o/o p.afrom date of application till realization.

¶39

i) The Appricant Bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated assets as described in the schedule to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶40

ii) the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

iii) The Appricant Bank is entiiled to the costs of the oA.

¶42

iv) The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶43

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶45

(Dictated.lg..the P'A', transcribed by her,.corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open
pau{"t'ottthis:the 22nd day of Nov.,2O2i)
,,,i)"' -.o-r.'r r.rt' .:..,.. -, '-.':...,.
.{y'' zfr. i . '.' i { '*i .i ,i-i,_ ",..,
;l/ ' d . ' '":1. :.) ' tr,,. 'i ,
.;.1. "'o' :Jj ''i' 7;' '': I " i
).
sd/-
'' ,, li i{i.,i/
PRESIDING OFFICER
'1)
.,<br>'. I
-"(,. +!- : ' .,. ,[ o^---
' -Aori. R:sis(;21. >l n /- rr--

¶46

DRT. I, rf YOfi i l,'1, ir..? $"

State Bank of India v. Ms Akshara Digital

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Ms Akshara Digital

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank versus Neha Creation and Ors.

State Bank of India versus Md. Hasmat Khan

State Bank of India versus Mrs Pushpa Devi

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Abdul Qayoom Mangnoo

Canara Bank versus Santosh Kumar

Allahabad Bank versus M/S S.R Enterprises