Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt. Ltd.

DRT11 Oct 2023OA/18/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by the State Bank of Indiawhich sought recovery of a loan and interest against the principal borrower and guarantors, finding the bank's claim substantiated. Costs attached and recovery certificate issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants restrained to pay total sum of Rs.54,64,386/ with interest. Order of attachment made absolute. Recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.18 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Bra n ch, SARB-2), 1-B-563/1, RTC cross roads, Opp Sandhya theatre, 1't floor, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad -20. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applica nt

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt Ltd, Represented by its director, C-81, 1't floor, Rukminipuri colony, Above Ravi Dental clinic, Kapra, Hyderabad - 500 062.

¶9

Smt Mendu Rajani Kumari, w/o M. Venkateswara Rao, aged 60^yrs, female, H.No.31, Suryanagar colony, Sain ikpu ri, Yapral, Jawahar nagar, Shameerpet, Hyderabad - 500 087.

¶10

Sri Mendu Srin ivas, S/o Venkateswara rao, aged 34^yrs, Male, villa no.21, Krupa^patel villas, Ashok Manipuri colony, Near La litha Ammavari temple, Kapra, AS Rao nagar, Hyderabad - 500 062.

¶11

endants

¶12

(oA.No.18/2023)

¶13

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

Sri C. Prabhakar

For the Defendants

Expa rte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery oF a total sum of Rs.54,64,386/- (Rupees Fifty Four Lakhs Sixty four thousand Three hundred and Eighty six only) i.e., a) a sum of Rs.19,87,944l- together with further interest @ tt.9Oo/o p.a with monthly rests;

¶20

b) a sum of Rs.5,33,843/- together with further interest @ 12.15% p.a with monthly rests;

¶21

c) a sum of Rs,1,30,978/- together with further interest @ 9.65% p,a with monthly rests;

¶22

d) a sum of Rs.1,46,184/- together with further interest @ 12.15o/o p.a with monthly rests;

¶23

e) a sum of Rs.26,65,437l- together with further interest @ 12.15% p.a wlth monthly rests;

¶24

from date of application till the date of final realization and in default

¶25

bed in the schedule to

¶26

(oA.No.18/2023)

¶27

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant^{Bank states} that the defendant No.1 is a^private limited^company /^principal borrower and defendants 2 & 3 stood^{as guarantors availed term loanof} Rs,20.00 lakhs and cash credit of^{Rs.15.00lakhs totaling a sum of} Rs.35.00 lakhs vide sanction^{letter dated 24.tO.zOtB. To securedue} repayment of aforesaid^{facilities, defendantsI to 3 executed agreement} of loan cum hypothecation^{dated 24.10.2018.Defendants3 & 4} executed^{guarantee agreementdated 24.10'2018' To securedue} repayment of enhanced^{loan facilities, defendantsexecuted} supplementalagreementofloancumhypothecationdated26'L2'2019' Afteravailingtheloanfacilities,thedefendantsfailedtocomplythe terms of sanction,^{hence the applicant bank was constrainedto classify} the account^{as NPA and issuedlegal notice dated 30.12.2022'Inspite} of several^{requestsand demands, the defendantsdid not clearthe} outstanding.^{Hencethe OA.}

¶28

Defendants called^{absent and set exparte on 09'06'2023'}

¶29

3.ShriO.Muralidhar,ManageroftheApplicantBankexaminedhimself
aS AW.1 and exhibited relevant,.:docu rnents, which are marked as
.;/ .-,. ,;;^."'<br>.1. - ".,-il"\t{ll \
--- ^ Ex.A.1 .r +^ ltr to A.15. .lt -.-.. ' - , ,-, ,, r\ <br>,^
. ,::' :

¶30

(oA.No.18/2023)

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶32

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?

¶33

Defendants called 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.15. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim 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.

¶34

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

¶35

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to Applicant Bank a total sum Rs.54r64,386/(Rupees Fifty Four Lakhs Sixty four thousand Three hundred and Eighty six only) i.e., a) a sum of Rs.19,87,944/together with further interest @ 11.90o/o

¶36

p.a ;

¶37

b) a sum interest @ 12. 15o/o p.a;

¶38

c) a sum of Rs.1,30,97$/- together with fu interest @ 9.65olo p.a; 11 0[T 20n :il 4

¶39

(oA.No.18/2023)

¶40

d) a sum of Rs.1,46,184/together with further interest @12.15olo p.a;

¶41

e) a sum of Rs.26,65,437/together with further interest @ 12.150/o p.a from date of application till the date of final realization.

¶42

B. The applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as described in schedule to OA.

¶43

the Applicant Bank is also entitled 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.

¶44

The order of attachment passed in IA.No.1936/2023 against petition schedule property is made absolute,

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶49

(Dictated to the P.A. bed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open cou rt on this 23) ..i

¶50

{.<br>r.?f
11 0[I 2[n

¶51

sd/-
(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
-i'iEr,iE coPY
,*,;w\iv

State Bank of India v. M/S. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt. Ltd.

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

State Bank of India versus Ms Indira Poultry Farm

Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Sharadha Binders

Bank of India versus M/S. S. v. Constructions

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Vedanta Cosmecuticals

Ms Sri Radhakrishna Agro Industries versus Union Bank of India

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Vikas Bank versus Sri. Mamilla Damodar Yadav