Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Kyra Transmission Industries

DRT1 Dec 2023OA/190/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DR Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 44,48,997/- including interests. The court held that the bank established its claim through examined witnesses and documents.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs.44,48,997/- with future interest and costs; Defendants 2 & 3 jointly and severally liable; Applicant entitled to proceed against properties of Defendants.

State Bank of India versus M/S Kyra Transmission Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.19O ot 2023

¶4

Between :

¶5

State Bank of India, Assets Recovery Management Branch, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Kyra Transmission Industries, Represented by its Managing Partner A. Sravya Reddy, D/o A. Dharma Reddy,

¶9

Plot no.35/82, SV Co-operative Industrial Estate, Road no.12, IDA, JeedimeUa, Hyderabad _ 55.

¶10

Miss A. Sravya Reddy, D/o A. Dharma Reddy, major, t-emale, managing partner of M/s. Kyra Transmission Industries, Plot no.35/B2, SV Co-operative Industrial Estate, Road no.12,

¶11

IDA, Jeedimeila, Hyderabad _ 55.

¶12

And also at

¶13

H.No. 19-453/1, Reddy cotony, Miryalguda, Nalgonda - 5OB 207.

¶14

ffi
* niiri!'.rml
s*
W*

¶15

(OA.No.190 of 2023)

¶16

Mr. M. Shiva pranay Reddy, S/o M. Venkat Reddy, major, IVale, partner of M/s. Kyrj Transmission Industries, Plot no.35/82, SV Co_operative Industrial Estate, Road no.12, IDA, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad _ 55.

¶17

And also at

¶18

H. No..19-453/1, Reddy colony, Miryalguda, Nalgonda _ SOB;07.

¶19

Defendants

¶20

Counsel for the parties:

¶21

For the Applicant

¶22

For the Defendants

¶23

Sri K. Narayana Rao Exparte

¶24

ORDER

¶25

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants For recovery of a total sum of Rs.44,4g,9g7l- (Rupees Forty four lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Nine hundred and Eighty Sevenonly) i.e., a sum of Rs.2B,BB,2BBI_ under cash credit loan with interest @ 17.25o/o p.a with monthly rests and a sum of Rs.15,60,699/- under Term loan with interest @ 13.40olo p.a with monthly rests from 20.05.2023 till the date of realization.

¶26

As per the averments in the tion, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant ':,.is b. [rip firm represented by defendants 2 & 3 ers avari it facility of Rs.25.00

¶27

(OA.No.190 of 2023)

¶28

lakhs and a term loan facility of Rs.33.00 lakhs respectively. Defendants 2 & 3 stood as guarantors for the due repayment of outstanding in loan accounts. To secure the repayment of loan facirities, the defendants executed retter oF arrangement in favour of applicant bank on 04.Ot.2O2I. The defendants 2 & 3 also executed guarantee agreement dated 04.01.2021. After availing the loan facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NPA and issued legal notice dated 15.05.2023. Inspite of several reguests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶29

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 25.10.2023.

¶30

Sri S. Rajendraprasad, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined

¶31

himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are

¶32

marked as Ex.A.1 to A. 10.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

prayed for?

¶37

Defendants called @"qN nt andi:set expdrft substantiate the case of the Applicant k, Svy.$Iflofflpftt ot Applicant Bank was

¶38

(OA.No.190 of 2023)

¶39

examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.10. In view of the above, I hold that the Appricant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entired to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶40

B. In the resurt, the present oA is ailowed with costs, as under:

¶41

The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.44,48,gg7/_ (Rupees Forty four lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Nine hunclred and Eighty

¶42

Seven only) i.e., a sum of Rs.2B,gB,2gB /_ under cash credit loan with interest @ I7.25o/o p.a and a sum of Rs.15,60,699/- under Term loan with interest @ 13.40% p.a from 20.05.2023 till the date of realization;

¶43

the Appricant Bank is arso entired 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 Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶45

The Applicant shall file
within two weeks from the
date of receipt of ord
ffi
6+#
h, tr',
r. :_-J
13. Issue Recovery
:e accordingly. 1
0'i ,::[ ?tl2l]
c?
rn. a-,
d-rat
^€S
Wtu;rr9

¶46

(OA.No.19O of 2023)

¶47

t4. communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶48

(Dictated to the P'A', transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1't day of Dec, 2023)

¶49

sd/-

¶50

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFTCER

¶51

ffi
{aa* olot[zun :
'l r.J
. i.'-. a CF r
**,*9

¶52

(t;iwfu
.fissr. Regilrrai

¶53

DRT.I, HYDERATLAD,

¶54

State Bank of India v. M/S Kyra Transmission Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Kyra Transmission Industries

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

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

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

State Bank of India versus M S Sai Radheshyam Filling Station

Nandini Industries India Pvt. Ltd. and Others versus State Bank of India

Smt Gorty Sai Lakshmi versus Dcb Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Nagendra Hotels Pvt. Ltd.