Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Srinivasa Communications and Services

DRT28 Nov 2023OA/180/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 48.20 lakhs with future interest. The bank was entitled to proceed against the defendants and their hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Respondents jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 48.20 lakhs with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated property.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Srinivasa Communications… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER' 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.la0 ol 2()23

¶5

Between :

¶6

State Bank of India, ARMB, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, TS Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Srinivasa communications And Services, Represented by its Proprietor Mrs. GaddamVasantha, female, Aged major, 3-2-86/B/ l, Kamala Nehru colony, Armoor, Nizamabad district - 503 224.

¶10

Mrs.GaddamVasantha, Female, aged major, 3-2-86/8/ l, Kamala Nehru colony, Armoor, Nizamabad District - 503 224. TS. Defenda nts

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Applicant Sri A.M. Kira n Kumar
//*
// 4<br>For the Defenda
Yl:
is ?o
Rh

¶12

(oA. No.180/2023)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.48,2O,254l- (Rupees Forty Eight Lakhs Twenty thousand Two hundred and Fifty four only) with future interest @ 12.40olo p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated assets as described in the schedule to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 as proprietor of M/s. srinivasa communications and services availed term loan facility of Rs.49 lakhs. The defendant company represented by its proprietor Mrs. GaddamVasantha executed letter of arrangement, agreement of loan cum hypothecation to secure term loan limit on 31.O3.2021. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 2g,Og.2022 and issued legal notice dated 31.03.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶16

"
W
i/,'f'-
3. Defenda ntscalled a lnt and set exoarte o]f 0i L.2023.
: zBilou?m *

¶17

W**9

¶18

(oA. No.180/2023)

¶19

Sri D. Naga Prasad, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex,A.1to A.5.

¶20

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶21

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?

¶22

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.5. 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.

¶23

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

¶24

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.48, Forty Eight Lakhs Twenty thousand Two only) with future ')111^*

¶25

(oA.No.180/2023)

¶26

interest @ 12.40olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

The Applicant Bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated movable property as described in the schedule to OA,

¶28

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

¶29

t2. The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶33

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 28th day of Nov, 2023)

¶34

sdt_

¶35

,,,1s "ffi'h<br>J z I Notl ,rr2:r :
rrf-3$
KSaut#

¶36

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶37

rr:ff:k

¶38

ART.I, !.IYDER.N 9 AO,

¶39

State Bank of India v. M/S. Srinivasa Communications and Services

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Srinivasa Communications and Services

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ms Pocharam Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus Idbi Bank & Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Parsi Sivayya and Co.

Bank of India versus Mr. Ramesh Gollapelly

Indian Bank versus M/S. Sri Guru Charan Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M/S.Varalaxmi Electronics and Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M S Sai Radheshyam Filling Station

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Ms Pocharam Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus Idbi Bank &amp; Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Parsi Sivayya and Co.

Bank of India versus Mr. Ramesh Gollapelly

Indian Bank versus M/S. Sri Guru Charan Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M/S.Varalaxmi Electronics and Enterprises

State Bank of India versus M S Sai Radheshyam Filling Station

Ms Pocharam Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus Idbi Bank & Others