Allowed

State Bank of India v. S Pabhakar Reddy

DRT10 Apr 2023OA/128/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by SBI for recovery of dues against two defendants. The defendants appeared ex-parte, and the court held them liable based on documentary evidence, granting the bank the sum with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are liable to pay the applicant bank Rs.59,89,782/- with future interest and costs. The bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property, person, and properties of the defenda

State Bank of India versus S Pabhakar Reddy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE IOTIi DAY OF APRIL, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B,Com, L.LB. (HoNS.), M,A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

oA. NO. 1.28 OF 2022

¶4

state Bank of India SARB-II Chikkadpa lly Opp: Sandhya Theatre RTC X Roads, Hyderabad Rep. by Chief Ma nager. ....Applicant.

¶5

Versus 1. lvlr. S. Prabhakar Reddy S/o S. Laxma Reddy Aged: 50 years, Occ: Business S/o H. No. 0l-73/447 Veenus Enclave, Road No.13 Near Thatva Global High School Gajularamaram, Hyderabad-55. Also at: M/s. Vikas Satellite Network H. No.5-28-536/1 Sai Baba Nagar Near Hanuman Temple IDA, Jeedimetla Hyderabad - 500 055. 2. Smt. S. Manjula W/o S. Prabhakar Reddy Aged:49^years, Occ: Business H. No. 2-66/243 to 246/736/74 Near Ramky Towers ... Defenda nts. Gajularamaram, Hyderabad-55.

¶6

0lr/

¶7

oA.t28l2022

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant Defendants

¶9

: Mr. M Venkat Divakar.

¶10

: Ex-parte,

¶11

:: ORDER ::

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a total sum of Rs.59,89,782/- i.€., Rs.43,90,37t/- under loan account No.40038355259, Rs.4,80,65U- under loan account No.4003429132 and Rs.11,78,760/- under loan account No. 40080805402 respectively from the Defendants with further interest @7.650/o p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @2o/o^p.a. from 08.02.2022 till the date of realisation along with costs, and sale of OA schedule property.

¶13

The defendants served with summons. The defendants were set exparte on 20.09.2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶14

The Applicant Bank examined P. Prabhakar, Manager as AW-1 and marked 20, documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.20.

¶15

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the material placed on record.

¶16

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶17

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property as prayed for? A*-/ (v

¶18

-,i.ij ' :i' : "--r "

¶19

oa.1,2a/2022

¶20

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.20 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶21

In the result, the present Original Application No.128/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶22

i) The Defendants are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.59,89,782/- i.e., Rs.43,90,371l- under loan account No.40038355259, Rs.4,80,651/- under loan account No.4003429732 and Rs.11,18,760l- under loan account No.40080805402 respectively with future interest @7.25o/o^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶23

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of property described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its dues;

¶24

iii) the applicant bank ls also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶25

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

d-/

oA.t28l2022

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 10th day of April, 2023).

¶32

.$(r* ESHWAR KOIHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. S Pabhakar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. S Pabhakar Reddy

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

Similar cases

Indian Bank versus Sri Sanjib Changmai

Uco Bank versus M/s a B Paper

Palakurthy SAtaiah versus State Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S a K Sales

Bank of India versus M/s Balaji Traders and others

Indian Bank versus M/S Avenir Eco Projects Pvt. Ltd.