Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Vasantha Engineers @ Vasantaa Engineers

DRT21 Sept 2023OA/150/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SBI filed an OA to recover dues of approx Rs. 4.39 crores from M/s. Vasantha Engineers and partners. The absence of respondents was noted. The Presiding Officer allowed the OA after finding the bank established its case, directing recovery of dues, interest, and costs, and authority to execute properties.

What did the court decide?

Debt of Rs. 4,39,71,038/- with interest @ 11.45% p.a. and Rs. 20,66,577/- with interest @ 9.25% p.a., costs, and recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Vasantha Engineers… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.1SO ol 2023

¶3

Between :

¶4

State Bank of India, Asset Recovery Management Branch (SARB)-II, first floor, Opp Sandhya Theatre, RTC cross roads, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. Vasantha Engineers @ Vasantaa Eng ineers, A partnership firm Represented by its partners- the Defendants2&3herein. H.No.2-2-1 108/1 and 1/G-8, Saga city apartment, Beside Tilaknagar hospital, New Nallakunta, Hyderabad - 5OO 044.

¶8

Sri Alluguvelly Srinivasa Reddy, s/o Sri A. Seetha Rama Reddy, aged about 50 years, occ: business partner oF 1.t deFendant firm H.No.7-4-7 6/50-401, street no.B, Habsiguda, .Hyderabad - 5OO 007,

¶9

kule nagar, rpet, 3.

¶10

(OA. No.1s0/2023)

¶11

Smt Alluguvelly Sushma, w/o sri Alluguvelly Srinivasa Reddy, aged about 47 years, female, occ: business & partner of 1'r defendant firm.

¶12

H.No. 1-4-76150-401, street no.B, Habsiguda, Hyderabad - 5OO OO7.

¶13

¶14

H.No. 3- 10-20 / t2, Gokute n a9a r, Ramanthapur, Am berpet, Hyderabad - 500 013. Defendants

¶15

Counsel for the Pa rties:

¶16

For the Applicant

¶17

For the Defenda nts

¶18

Sri G. Prabhakar Sarma

¶19

Ex pa rte

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.4,39,71,03g/_ (Rupees Four Crores Thirty Nine lakhs Seventy one thousand and thirty eight only) i.e., a sum of Rs.4,19,04,46t/- under ABL a/c.No,3B41B9B1158 with interest @ 11.45% p.a and a sum of Rs.20,66,577/_ under GECI account with interest @ 9.25olo p.a with monthly rests from the date of a.ppllcation ti, the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of . tl .r^..::.

¶22

mortg_aged -properties as described in the schedule (item no,1 to 14)

¶23

,-.r to 64. ,1 , 2 ?^r 5[i ]i# ,,, ,,1! r.'j

¶24

(OA.No.1s0/2023)

¶25

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant No.1 is a partnership firm carrying on business of construction in the name and style of ,,Vasantaa Engineers,,. Defendants 2 & 3 are partners of defendant no.1 firm availed Asset Backed loan (ABL) o Rs.5oo rakhs under Droprine oD scheme vide sanction retter dated 01.04.2019. The defendants 2 & 3 stood as guarantors and executed guarantee agreement. The defendants 1 to 3 created equitable mortgage by deposit of original regd sale deed document no.2728/2012 dated 3t.O7.2Ot2 over its immovable properties more fuily described in the schedure to oA. In the right of Covid 19 pandemic, the defendant no.1 firm availed GECL loan of Rs.20.00 lakhs and defendants 2 & 3 guaranteed due repayment of said roan facirities on 31.72.2027. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 27.03.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶26

absent and set exparte on 01.09.2023.

¶27

*
a, -:r: ,,:'
.,
, ;,.,

¶28

(oA. No.1s0/2023)

¶29

Shri Ch. Raghavender Rao, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.15.

¶30

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

prayed for?

¶34

7' Defendants ca'ed absent and set exparte, To substantiate the case of the Appricant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A,15. In view of the above' I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is enti'ed to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶35

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶36

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant t" of Rs'4'39'71'og8 /- (Rupees Four crores ,'9. ',':"at:' l,F * c.No,38418981158 with 2 I SEP ZWJ ._, li :-./^,.+ /l r..t$;jl t':,i/

¶37

.:,;-'"-

¶38

(oA.No.1s0/2023)

¶39

interest @ 11.45olo p.a and a sum of Rs.20,66,577/_ under GECL account with interest @ 9.25o/o p.a from the date of application till the date of rea lization;

¶40

the Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties as described in the schedule (item No.1 to 14) to OA

¶41

towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

the Applicant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendants no.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶43

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

¶44

The Applicant shal fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶45

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶46

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶47

transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open *ay of Sept, 2023)

¶48

4.5.''' 'U-'-'E--
-t-*,' .,'',' t' ffi
4-',.{f ilYt': ' . ,,irl

State Bank of India v. M/S. Vasantha Engineers @ Vasantaa Engineers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Vasantha Engineers @ Vasantaa Engineers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M S Amruthamayee Milk Products versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Sri Syed Iqbal

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Benex Industries

Union Bank of India ( Formerly Andhra Bank) versus M/S. Mirror Advertising Agency

State Bank of India versus M/S Shiva Earth Movers

State Bank of India versus Sri. Ratan Pillay