Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Shobha Rani

DRT6 Nov 2023OA/194/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Origin Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of dues from two defendants. The bank was granted the right to recover the principal amount with interest from a mortgaged property and the personal assets of the borrowers.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs.39,45,795 with interest; allowing action against mortgaged property and personal assets; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Shobha Rani — Banking and Recovery | 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

¶3

OA.No.194 ot 2022

¶4

Between :

¶5

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

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Smt Vodela Shobha Rani, w/o Sri Vodela Nagaraju, 3,s^:! :bgr^t_48.years,^{occ: business,} F1.No.4- 1-36, Kothur Janda,

¶9

St. Joseph,s High School Lane, Hanumakonda - 506 OO1. Warangal city - TS. 2. Sri Vodela Nagaraju, s/o Sri Sudarshan, aged about 54 years, occ: business. H.No.4-1 36, Kothur Janda, St. Joseph's High School Lane, Hanumakonda - 506 OOl. Warangal city - TS. Defendants

¶10

Counsel for the pa rties:

¶11

For the Applicant
f4.. Arav ind
For the Defendants
.
nadhir Singh

)n2?

¶12

(oA.No.794/20221

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.39,45,795l_ (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Forty Five thousand Seven hundred and Ninety Five only) (Rs.39,03,452l- in home loan + Rs.42,343/_ in Suraksha account) with future interest @ 9.30o/o p,a along with penal interest @ 2 o/o p.a with monthry rests from 20.04.2022 ti, the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged immovabre property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants are wife and husband who avaired housing roan of Rs.38.00 lakhs and premium of Home loan insurance coverage of Rs,1,25,000/- vide arrangement letter dated 23.08.2016. The defendants executed home loan application dated 10.08.2016 & 17 'OB'20t6, arrangement retter dated 23.08.2016 and memorandum of loan agreement for home loan granted to public dated 23.08.2016. the defendants created equitable mortgage of schedule property in favour of applicant bank on 07.09,2016 by deposit of Regd Sale deed document no.3463/2O16 d Q16.^{After availing the loan} facilities, the defendant6 fqj terms of sa nction, hence : o6MUry23^*

¶16

¶17

(OA.No.19a/2OZ2l

¶18

the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 08.10.2021 and issued demand notice dated 12.11.2021. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendant counsel filed vakalath but not filed written statement.

¶20

Sri Ganji prasad, city case officer of the Appricant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A,B.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶22

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?

¶23

7, Though Defendant counsel filed vakalath but not filed written statement. To su bstantiate 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.B. In view of the above, I hold that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the k is entiUed to recover the claim made in the OA w 3 ,)rvl^* tl E}lOU

¶24

(oA.No.79a/2o2zl

¶25

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

¶26

The Defendants are jointry and severary riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.39,45,79Sl_ (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Forty Five thousand Seven hundred and Ninety Five only) (Rs.39,03,452l- in home loan + Rs.42,343/_ in Suraksha account) with future interest @ 9.30o/o p.a from 20.04.2022 till the date of realization;

¶27

The Applicant Bank is entiiled to proceed against the mortgaged immovable property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

The Appricant shail fire 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 h^er, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 6th djtalf Nov, 2023)

¶34

sd/-
{4n
(G. coPtcHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
TIItJE COPY
-ji:'M!.9

State Bank of India v. Smt. Shobha Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Shobha Rani

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 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 Sri. Vadluri Sambaiah

State Bank of India versus Sri Dontheboina Nageswara Rao

State Bank of India versus Mohd Kamar a Alam