Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri . Nallathigala Naresh

DRT8 Jun 2023OA/203/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this OA, the DRT allowed the applicant bank's recovery suit against a defaulting borrower, adjudging the bank's claim for principal, interest, and costs, and authorized proceeding against mortgaged and person properties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant bank is entitled to recover Rs.26,55,219/- with future interest, proceed against mortgaged property, and obtain recovery certificate.

State Bank of India versus Sri . Nallathigala Naresh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 8IH DAY OF JUNE' 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.2O3 OF 2022

¶5

Between :

¶6

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

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Nallathigala N a resh, s/o Sri Sambaiah, aged about 34 yrs, occ: business, H.No.2/ 334 / 4, Bank colony, Hasanparthy (M), Hanmakonda - 506 001 Warangal - TS. Defenda nt

¶10

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant For the Defendant

-''".:

(OA.No.203/2022)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.26,551219l- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Fifty Five thousand Two hundred and Nineteen only) with future interest @ 9.55o/o p.a along with penal interest @ 2olo p.a with monthly rests from 27.06.2022 till realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed housing loan limit of Rs.22.00 lakhs vide arrangement letter dated 16.01.2016. The defendant created equitable mortgage of schedule property in favour of Applicant bank on 16.01.2016 by deposit of registered sale deed document no.5228/2075 dated 09.12.2015 as security for due repayment of loan amounts. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 07.08.2021 and issued legal notice dated 13.12.2021 and demand notice dated Il.06.2O21r Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶16

Defendant was called absent and set exparte on 16.01.2023.

¶17

Shri Lakavath Narender Naik, City case officer of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.B.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant

¶19

0 B^txii 2m

¶20

(oA. No.203/2022)

¶21

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendant as prayed for?

¶22

The defendant was 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.B. In view of the above, i hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶23

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

¶24

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total Rs.26,55,219l- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Fifty Five thousand Two hundred and Nineteen only) with future interest @ 9.55o/o p.a from 21.06.2022 till the date of realization.

¶25

i) fhe Applicant Bank is entltled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in Schedule to the OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶26

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

¶27

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

.,.:

,a...'.: .-

(OA. No.203/2022)

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

¶33

Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶35

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 8th day of June, 2023)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

'1,,
, :, *
' nolllt!rlfff
.),08illl2m f,
'Rh,!s:l$9

¶40

TRUE COPY
DRil, I'r,'[Ogmf-tsiM
^*M1,

State Bank of India v. Sri . Nallathigala Naresh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri . Nallathigala Naresh

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

City Union Bank Limited versus Sri Mekala Satyanarayana

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Fraternity Interactive Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Srinivas Reddy

State Bank of India versus Sri. Krishnadhi Raghu