Allowed

State Bank of India v. Ms Sl Enterprises

DRT24 Aug 2022OA/34/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by State Bank of India against M/s. SL Enterprises and its proprietrix for recovery of financial dues including cash credit, car loan, and GECL with interest and proceeds against hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 60,83,209/- with interest, permission to proceed against hypothecated movables and properties of defendants, and issue of recovery certificate.

State Bank of India versus Ms Sl Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYI]RIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE 24rHDAy OF AUGUST, 2022

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPIC}|AND, PRESTDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.34 ol 2022

¶4

Between:

¶5

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

¶6

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. SL Enterprises,

¶10

Rep by its Proprietrix,

¶11

SmtMeruguSuneetha,

¶12

Wo^{Sri V. Lokeshwar} Reddy,

¶13

D. No.3-1-6147/ L/2, ptot no.2,

¶14

Green hills colony,

¶15

Mallapur, Hyderabad - 76.

¶16

Also at

¶17

Plot no,62, road no.12, Manikchand road, near APIIC, IDA, Nacharam, Hyderabad - 76.

¶18

y.No. 128,129,131& 132, ,^{Mallapur, Uppal,} Hvderabad - 5dt 76. 'ffittil1'[[$ ?l?^-: a, W/o Sri Reddy, / 2, plot no.2, Y

¶19

(oA.No.3412022)

¶20

Mallapur, Hyderabad - 76.

¶21

And also at

¶22

Plot no.44 part, Sy.No.128,L29,1318.. 132, Brahmapuri colony, Mallapur, Uppal, Hyderabad - 500 076.

¶23

Defendants

¶24

Counsel for the Parties:

¶25

For the Applicant

¶26

Shri C. Prabhakar

¶27

For the Defendants Exparte

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.6O,83,2O9l- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs Eighty three thousand Two hundred and Nine only) i.e., i) a sum of Rs.51,31,803/- under cash credit with further interest @ 14.75o/o p.a with monthly rests;

¶30

ii) a sum of Rs.2,77,744l- under car loan with further interest @ 8.800/o p.a with monthly rests;

¶31

iii) a sum of Rs.6,73,662/- under GECL loan with further interest @ 7.40o/o p,a with monthly rests;

¶32

fromdate of filing of OA till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movable property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶33

z.//? p?rre ts in the application, the Applicant Bank states /F,nu, ,H o No.1 is a Proprietary concern and defendant :^{n2.[ i6gvrp?onri&} . Defendant no.1 represented by Defendant

¶34

\6. no.2 availed cashl it of Rs.10.00 lakhs on 30.01.2013 which was Sfui..rt,,l".:F, .00 lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated

¶35

(oA.No.3al2022)

¶36

02.04.20t4. Defendants renewed the cash credit loan of Rs.15.00 lakhs and term loan of Rs.13.00 lakhs totaling Rs.28.OO lakhs and executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 04.L2.2014. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 01.02.2022. Inspite of reminders and notices, the defendants failed to respond. Hence this OA.

¶37

Defendants were set exparte on 2L06.2022.

¶38

Shril. NarendraNaik, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.28.

¶39

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶40

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

¶41

The deferidants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.28. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and licant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in

¶42

fut0re interest and costs, 7

¶43

**
8.1 rl fnJUE Jffitn"n OA is allowed with costs, as under:
.4"$.
^Ps,

¶44

(oA.No.3al2022)

¶45

The Defendants No. 1 & 2 are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum Rs.6O,g3,2O9l- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs Eighty three thousand Two hundred and Nine only) i.e., i) a sum of Rs.51,31,803/- under cash credit with further interest @ 74.75o/o p.a;

¶46

ii) a sum of Rs.2,77,744/- under car loan with further interest @ 8.80o/o p.ai

¶47

iii) a sum of Rs.6,73,6621- under GECL loan with further interest @ 7.40o/o p.afrom date of filing of OA till the date of realization.

¶48

i) The applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movabres as described in schedure to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶49

ii) the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of Defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶50

iii) The Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the OA.

¶51

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

¶52

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶53

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶54

sisned and pronounced bv me in the open :ffi,fltpil;::lT't^:it ,l1xorrected, NS'I sdl -- [^[lJE 2s2

¶55

sdl -- TRUE COPY ,"J3;iiT,3TIi3] A^{.^A--.- /-,} *i oiif,l;1';';:;,P f^N fu,,---

State Bank of India v. Ms Sl Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Ms Sl Enterprises

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

Bank of India versus Mahesh Dhirajlal Shah

Bank of India versus Fanindra

Bank of India versus Babulal

Ms Lakshmiji Traders and others versus Punjab National Bank

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S J K Enterprises and Ors.

Icici Bank Limited versus Ms Bulls Eye Shipping and Logistic and Ors.