Allowed

State Bank of India v. Esanya the Restaurant

DRT18 Nov 2022OA/97/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an origin application filed by a bank against restaurant owners and guarantors for recovery of loan dues, permitted realization from mortgaged and personal properties, and adjudged costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.56.01 lakhs with interest; permit proceeds against mortgaged property and defendants properties; order for recovery certificate executed.

State Bank of India versus Esanya the Restaurant — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.97 ot 2022

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery branch,

¶6

2nd floor, TSRTC Bus terminal complex (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti, Hyderabad.

¶7

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Esanya The Restaurant, Rep by its Partner Smt C. Laxmi Devi w/o B. Jalandhar Reddy, aged major, occ: business, lB-L-607, Bhavani

¶11

nagar, opp to bank of Baroda,

¶12

W Mahal road, Tirupati - 517 501.

¶13

Also at

¶14

D. No. 1 9- 1 2- 1 7 4, Bairagipeatteda, Tirupathi, AP - 517 501.

¶15

Smt. P. Lakshmi^prasanna, w/o N. Narasimha Reddy, partner of Easanya The Restaurant aged major, occ: business, D.No.7/556, Ambika nagar Prodduru YSR, Kadapa-s16 360.

¶16

Sri O. Ravindra Reddy, slo"Subba, Reddy, aged major, .lttCo .Ctc:^business, i"i".vlii',^{D ;NptZ} r5t[i / lib^620, sot . j slti N8ltdffii

¶17

gw/-o N. Narasimlla, major, '/ss6,

¶18

(oA.No.97 of 2022)

¶19

Ambika nagar,^prodduru ySR, Kadapa -516 360.

¶20

Smt C. Laxmi Devi, w/o B. Jalandhar Reddy, D..No. 19-1 2-174, Bairagipettada, Tirupathi - 517 501.

¶21

Defendants

¶22

Counsel for the^parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Sangeetha Jaiswal

Exparte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA agalnst Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.56,Ol,g96/(Rupees Fifty Six lakhs One thousand Eight hundred and Ninety six only) i.e., a sum of Rs.34,67,779/- with interest @ 1S.90 o/o p.awith monthly rests plus 2o/o p.a penal interest ; a sum of Rs.20,12,514l with future interest @ 10.g00/o p.a with monthry rests prus 20/o pendr interest and a sLlm of Rs.1,27,603/- witn future interest @ 12.80o/o p.a with monthry rests from 25.02.2022 tiil the date of rearization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule

¶29

to OA.

¶30

nts in the application, the Applicant Bank states .1 is a firm represented by partners defendants

¶31

,i.q dry,y?o a nts 2 to 5 stood as guarantors to the loan

¶32

¶33

(oA.No.97 of 2022)

¶34

availed, The defendant no.l firm availed cash credit facility of Rs.15.00 lakhs vide arrangement letter dated 28.06.20L7 and executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation, guarantee agreement, memorandum of recording of creation of mortgage by deposit of tifle deeds dated 28.06.2077 and retter of confirmation for creation of mortgage by deposit of tiue deeds dated 30.06.2017. To secure the loan, the defendants deposited title deed bearing no.4320/20L2 of sRo, Kadapa on 28.06.2017 as described in the schedule to OA. The defendants availed term loan limit of Rs.36,00 lakhs on 27.03.2020 and also a sum of Rs.1,11,396/_ under covid emergency vide arrangement dated 23.Og.ZOZO. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NPA on 29.03.202L and issued legal notice on 01.03.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶35

? Defendants were called absent set exparte on 30.09.2022.

¶36

Satyaprasad, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are 1 to A.26. nsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶37

(oA.No.97 of 2022)

¶38

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶39

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶40

The defendants were caled 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,A1 to 4.26. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶41

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under;

¶42

The Defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total of Rs.56,01,g96l-(Rupees Fifty Six lakhs One thousand Eight hundred and Ninety six only) i.e., a sum of Rs.34,6L,779l- with interest @ 15.90 o/o p.a j a sum of Rs.20,12,5t4l- with future interest @ 1O.gO% p.a and a sum of ;kzAE3/- with future interest @ 12.80o/o p.a from 25.02.2022

¶43

¶44

¶45

u^{18 l,l0l,2[22} dl .4- " 1$rftro-1..i-.WiP' 4

¶46

(OA.No.97 of 2022)

¶47

i) The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶48

ii) the Applicant Bank is also entiiled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 to 5 and properties of Defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶52

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶53

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by^her, .corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open pqF+hilQe 18th day of Nov., 2022)

¶54

"*ri
ffi'J:: r" , TRUE COFY
sd/-
.,l@
10 il0u (4, PRESIDING OFFICER
Assl. Wglxrar
ORf'[, ii "lLttrF ^

State Bank of India v. Esanya the Restaurant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Esanya the Restaurant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus Ramesh

M Muralidhara Kumar versus South Indian Bank

Ergo Foam versus Federal Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Satbhani Marbles and Tiles and others

State Bank of India versus M/S. Oom Narayani Traders

Union Bank of India versus Bhanumatiben