Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Kamalla Ailaiah

DRT6 Sept 2023OA/130/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application by State Bank of India to recover principal, interest, and proceed against mortgaged properties from a defaulting borrower who failed to clear dues on home and Suraksha loans.

What did the court decide?

Defendant ordered to pay Rs.31,80,565/- with future interest; bank entitled to enforce security and proceed against defendant's other properties; recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kamalla Ailaiah — DRT (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.13O of 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Center, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr. Kamalla Ailaiah, S/o Sri Narsaiah, aged major, Male, H.No.11-4-21, Bharath nagar, Siddipet district - 502 103.

¶9

Defenda nt

¶10

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

Sri C. Sreedhar

For the Defendant

Exparte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for sum of Rs.31,8O,565/- (Rupees Thirty One phd five hundred and Sixty five only) i.e., i* .: :1^{06 SEPzTB} 'r,"$-o,u :,. x&*

¶17

(oA.No.130/2023)

¶18

a sum of Rs.30,94,578/- under loan account No.39077896203 together with further interest @ 10.01o/o p.a with monthly rests from 27.03.2023 till the date of realization and a sum of Rs.B5,9B7l- under Suraksha loan account together with further interest @ 10.01% p.a from 27.03.2023 till realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed home of Rs.30,88,500/- for purchase and construction of house in Sy.No.2153 in plot no.75 (part) o 200 sq,yds situated at Siddipet, Old GP Gadichderlapally, Siddipet district. The defendant executed memorandum of loan agreement for home loan and deed of undertaking dated 16,01.2020. After executing security documents the defendant purchased and constructed the house as described in the schedule to OA. After availing the loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 11.05.2022 and issued legal notice dated 13.03.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the'ooEitdrid.inq. Hence this OA.

¶20

(oA.No.13Ol2023)

¶21

Defendant was called absent and set exparte on 07.0g.2023.

¶22

Shri Govinda Raju, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himserf as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.10.

¶23

5 Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

prayed for?

¶27

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 relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A. 10. 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 Applicant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶28

B. In the resu lt,

¶29

costs, as u nder:

¶30

(oA.No.130/2023)

¶31

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.31,8O,565/- (Rupees Thirty One Lakhs Eighty thousand Five hundred and Sixty five only) i.e.,

¶32

a sum of Rs.30,94,578/- under loan account No.39077896203 together with further interest @ 10.010/o p.a from 27.03.2023 till the date of realization and a sum of Rs.85,987/- under Suraksha loan account together with further interest @ 10.01o/o p.a from 27,03.2023 till the date of realization ;

¶33

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.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

--'-.
(pit6tu9 to tfre }et)1)\scribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open
;,i ,ro$.rt ,ib' ofl this the , 6th drl.oF.Sept, l\ .. 2023)
:':: i:' , :. '-'ri iil' 1. ), --Sdt-
L ri
j (G. GOPICHAND)
_ * 0 .' i[P ,i,j
lrKEs
: :. .. ... , . . ,: .., ir ,,1,
t' ,.. ,..,., l"' t
arr=,,-ffin,
i?T'i ' r1l

State Bank of India v. Mr. Kamalla Ailaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Kamalla Ailaiah

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Bhaskar

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Swaran Singh

Mr Shabeer Sheik Abdulla versus Canara Bank

Bank of India versus M/S. Kavitha Constructions

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sai Sravan Health Care Private Limited

Canara Bank versus Raghavan Naik Karamthod