Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. Vadluri Sambaiah

DRT6 Nov 2023OA/186/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, the DT allowed OA.186/2022 filed by State Bank of India against Sri Vadluri Sambaiah for recovery of a home loan default. The court held the bank established its claim and ordered the defendant to pay Rs.40,75,303 with future interest, allowing sale of mortgaged property and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The Defendant is to pay Rs.40,75,303 with future interest; the bank is entitled to proceed against mortgaged and other properties; recovery certificate was issued.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Vadluri Sambaiah — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.186 of 2022

¶3

Between :

¶4

State Bank of India, Retail Assets & Small Medium Enterprises, City Credit Centre, (RASMECCC), Warangal Zonal office, H.No.9-1-2, JpN Road. Warangal - 506 OO2. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Sri Vadluri Sambaiah, s/o Sri Ramaiah, aged about 54 years, occ: business, H.No.1-22-673. Pothana Vari Veedhi. Warangal - 506 OO2. Telangana State

¶8

Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the parties:

¶10

For the Applicant : Sri Y. Aravind For the Defendant : Sri T. Ranadhir Singh

¶11

ORDER

¶12

¶13

against Defendant for (Rupees Forty Lakhs

¶14

(oA. No.186/2022)

¶15

Seventy Five thousand Three hundred and three only) with future interest @ 9.55o/o p.a along with penal interest @ 2 o/o p.a from 20.O4.2022 till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶16

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed home loan of Rs.38.00 lakhs vide arrangement retter dated 06.04.2016. to secure due repayment of roan amount, the defendant executed Home loan application dated 04.04.20L6, arrangement letter dated 06.04.2016 and memorandum of loan agreement for home loan granted to public dated 06.04.2016. The defendant created equitable mortgage of schedule property on 19.o4.2016 by deposit of registered sare deed doc.no.1305/2016 dated 06.04.20L6. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendant faired to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on 3.10.2021 and issued

¶17

demand notice dated 12.11.2021,. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶18

counser for Defendant fired vakarath but not fired written statement.

¶19

(oA.No.186/2022)

¶20

Shri Ganji Prasad Naik, City Case Officer of the Applicant Bank

¶21

examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited releva nt documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.B.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

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

¶24

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant as prayed

¶25

for?

¶26

7 ' Though defendant counser fired vakarath but not fired written statement. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.g. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶27

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

¶28

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.4O,ZS,gO3/_ ( s Seventy Five thousand Three hundred and interest @ e.55o/o p.a ?O*^{,O*.l ;ffire} from 20.04.2022 til date of realization l g^05[,grlmt : ,w

¶29

(oA. No.186/2022)

¶30

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged

¶31

property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶32

the Appricant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribe( corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 6th day * ,*1 :i5,

¶38

sd/-

¶39

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶40

j oBruorl?rrn
lJ, .
i.
W',r#

¶41

State Bank of India v. Sri. Vadluri Sambaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. Vadluri Sambaiah

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

State Bank of India versus Mrs/Ms. Dabiikar Pranitha

State Bank of India versus M/S. Global Steel Traders

State Bank of India versus M/S. Rekha Automotives

State Bank of India versus Smt. Shobha Rani

State Bank of India versus Sri Dontheboina Nageswara Rao

State Bank of India versus Mohd Kamar a Alam