Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 25,00,945 along with future interest from the respondents who failed to comply with loan terms under a secured credit facility.
Defendants directed to pay Rs. 25,00,945 plus future interest at 14.75% p.a.; recovery certificate issued.
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 AT HYDERABAD
DATED THrS THE 16rH DAy OF NOVEMBERT 2022
PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER
OA.No.76 ol 2O22
Between:
State bank of India, SARB-II, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad - 500 020.
Represented by its Chief Manager
Applicant
VERSUS
Defendants
qsel for the Parties:
Applicant *.For the Defendants
Sri A.M. Kiran Kumar
Exparte
(oA.No.76/zo22l
ORDER
1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2S,OO,g45l_ (Rupees Twenty five lakhs Eight hundred and forty five only) with future interest @ L4.75o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization and in default for sale 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 no,1 is a company run by directors/ defendants 2 & 3 avaired cash credit facirities of Rs.15.00 lakhs on 1g.01.2016 and executed letter of arrangement, agreement of hypothecation. The cash credit facirity avaired by defendant no.1 is secured by equitabre mortgage of apprication schedure property beronging to defendants 2 & 3. Defendants 2 & 3 deposited originar title deeds of schedure property by way of memorandum of deposit of tifle deeds on 19.01.2016. In the year 2018, the cash credit limit was enhanced of Rs.19.50 rakhs and sME credit prus limit of Rs.3.90 lakhs in totar rimit of Rs'23'40 lakhs and executed necessary documents. Defendants 2 & 3 executed guarantee agreement on 28.02.2020 and deposited the documents of title pertaining to the schedule property. After ,,.[j$nu, 4rvailrng,I|lfi,,:flfacilgigs, the defendants faited to compty the terms 15 )6f sanct pplicant bank was constrained to classify the
2
(oA.No.7 6/2oz2l
account as NPA on 28.1t.202L. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hencethis oA.
A 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?
(OA.No.76/20221
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants for recovery of dues?
STATE BANK OF INDIA
M/S. VISUAL COMFORT INDIA PVT LTD
MR. DOCHIBHOTLA KRISHNA SASTRY
MRS. DOCHIBHOTLA SUCHETA
GUMMADI GOPICHAND
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
