Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Dumpala Ramadevi

DRT26 Oct 2023OA/200/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an Original Application for recovery of a home loan of Rs.25,30,567 along with interest and future dues, the Tribunal allowed the application held that the bank successfully proved its case through documented evidence and sanctioned the recovery of the sum from the borrower.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs.25,30,567 with future interest; applicant permitted to proceed against mortgaged property and defendant's assets for realization.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Dumpala Ramadevi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.2OO of 2022

¶3

Between:

¶4

State Bank of India, Retail Assets & Small Medium Enterprises, City Credit Centre, (RASMECCC), Waranqal zonal Office, H.No.9-1-2, JiN road, Warangal - 506 002. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Smt Dumpala Ramadevi. w/o Sri Ramesh, aged about 49 years, occ: business, H. No.5- 1 1-341/ 1, Pochammakunta, Hanmakonda, Warangal - 506 001. TS,

¶8

Defenda nt

¶9

Counsel for the^pa rties:

¶10

For the Applicant

¶11

Sri Y. Aravind

¶12

For the Defendant
Expa rte
6%%<br>H 26[tlwj +
d- ."
4.q
'.u),,'r- -..J ^!r:-,r'
',.!.t---t7 ''.-r -t -^ ,.'!...^, ,i'...- 4.,-. -.,-"'3 . l -- -:-."'l; ::. .i1;:it";"/-;'
_. - , -.X.'

¶13

(OA.No.200 of 2022)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

1, The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.25,3O,567l_ (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Thirty Thousand Five hundred and sixty seven onry) with future interest @ 9.350/o p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 20/o p.a from 10.06.2022 tiil the date of rearization and in defaurt for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedure to oA.

¶16

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant avaired home roan of Rs,25.oo rakhs for purchase of semifinished constructed (Ground and first froor) RCC Roof house more fully described in apprication schedure vide arrangement retter dated 23.06.20L6. To secure repayment of roan amount, the defendant executed Home roan granted to pubric dated 23.06.2016. The defendant created equitabre mortgage of schedure property in favour of applicant bank on 76.07.2016 by deposit of Registered sale deed document no.25B2/20I6 dated 23.06.2016. After availing the loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on . r 07.08.2027 und j ;l k{-teop;"ti* f $f,ileofu nuti." dated 13,12,2021 , rnspite o f - .! i i; e:r_^z6olrwn -'(u(t' ofii l\ rd t- %'# =_'--^{-- ttt-}

¶17

(oA.No.200 of 2022)

¶18

several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence th is OA.

¶19

Sri T. Randhir Singh filed vakalath for defendant but not filed Written

¶20

Statement. Hence the right of filing of WS was forfeited on 21.06.2023.

¶21

Shri Dhanunjaya panda, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked

¶22

as Ex.A.1 to A,B.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

for?

¶27

counsel for defendant fired vakarath but not fired written statement. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex'A1 to A'9. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entitred to,recove,.the.craim made in the oA with

¶28

,.:',.-.i;:::ii'^r-.'j--;.

¶29

&, ?6 lcT2,[8

¶30

(oA.No.200 of 2022)

¶31

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

¶32

The DeFendant is riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a totar sum of Rs.25,30,567l- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Thirty Thousand Five hundred and Sixty Seven only) with future interest @ 9.35o/o p,a from 10.06.2022 ttl the date of realization ;

¶33

10' The Applicant Bank is entitred to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

13, The Applicant shal fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

( Dictated to the P.A. transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this

¶40

sd/_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶41

iRUE COFY
Asst i-esist'ar[!|t,
DRT.:, HY'9P.,,\8,4D,'

State Bank of India v. Smt. Dumpala Ramadevi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Dumpala Ramadevi

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

Bank of India versus Sri Mohammed Abdul Waheed

State Bank of India versus Smt Dumpala Srilatha

Arcil versus M/S Slava Therapeutics Pvt. Ltd.

State Bank of India, versus Sri v. Ram Mohan

State Bank of India versus Sri Chennaboina Naresh

State Bank of India versus Nakshatra Enterprises