Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri

DRT12 Oct 2023OA/206/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed a money recovery application filed by State Bank of India against two borrowers. The bank, representing a CHF loan facility, secured equitable mortgage over the mortgaged properties. The court upheld the bank's claim for the outstanding principal sum of Rs.81,57,105/- along with future interest at 11.25% p.a. and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.81,57,105/- with interest at 11.25% p.a.; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged properties and personal assets for debt realization.

State Bank of India versus Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA,No.2O6 of 2022

¶4

Between :

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRfC Bus Terminal complex, (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti, Hyderabad,

¶6

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri, s/o Sri Venkataramaiah, R/o t5-374-l-A, Jogappagari street, Madanapalli, Annamaya District, Andhra Pradesh -517 325.

¶10

Smt Chepuri Aparna, W/o Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri, R/o t5-374-1-A, Jogappagari street, Madanapalli, Annamaya District, Andhra Pradesh -5L7 325.

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Parties:

¶13

For the Applicant

¶14

For the Defendants

¶15

.6,<br>q )! 120CT20n lj

¶16

(oA. No.206/2022)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.81,57,105/- (Rupees Eighty one Lakhs Fifty Seven thousand One hundred and Five only) together with interest @ 11.250lo p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of final realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule^to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant^Bankstates that the defendants No.1 & 2 availed housing^{loan of Rs.B0'00 lakhs on} 31.05.2019 and executed necessary security loan documents.^To secure due repayment of outstanding liability the^{defendantsexecuted} memorandum of loan agreement for home loan^granted to^publicdated 31.05.2019. Defendant no.1 deposited the title^{deeds bearing regd} Sale deed No.2450/2019 dated 25.02.2019 with an^{intentionto create} equitable mortgage of OA schedule referred^{property. After availing} the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply^{the terms of sanction,} hence the applicant bank was constrained to^{classify the account as NPA} on 30.O4.2021 and issued demand notice dated 06.07.202t.^{Inspite of} ndants did not clear the

¶20

12^qtT MJ

¶21

(oA. No.206/2022)

¶22

Shri D. Raghavulu filed vakalath for defendants but not filed Written statement. Hence the right of filing of WS was forfeited on 17.08.2023.

¶23

Smt K. Geetha Lakshmi, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A,1 to A.B,

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶25

5, 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?

¶26

Counsel f cor defendants filed vakalath but not filed WS. To substantiate
the case o f the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was
exa m inedC and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.Al to A.8. In
view of th:he above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their
claim madtde in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant
Bank is enrntitled to recover.the-l{bim-maae in the OA with future interest
'. . ;,,.=rd(7rT .. !i 'c.\ - +i-,i)... ' "1",'.\ ' i'.
and costs.;. . ;' : .... g:il '--l 'i'.1.5.'r1'-'- a:. '.L\i
r .\i
1? 0rr 20m : rl
. '. i .. .:.... !|
'i, d-r. . .. .., \r-'' .\ ,. ':.1
\i:-a '' \s-... .: ,),'
:.:'

¶27

(OA. No.206/2022)

¶28

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

¶29

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to Applicant Bank a total sum Rs.81,57,1O5/- (Rupees Eighty one Lakhs Fifty Seven thousand One hundred and Five only) together with interest @ 11.25% p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶30

ii) The applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in schedule to OA.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶35

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶36

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of Oct, 2023)

¶37

. . ':r: ti J ....
sd/-
,,. '^ '-kry 't?jl o
l+, dD 'A\i (G. GOPTCHAND)
=:
* \ PRESIDING OFFICER
. 12 otT 2m _. jl
I '"
W**#

¶38

sd/-

State Bank of India v. Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri

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 M/S. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt. Ltd.

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Vikas Bank versus Sri. Mamilla Damodar Yadav

Ms Sri Radhakrishna Agro Industries versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Sri New Tech Readymix Concrete Private Limited

Bank of India versus M/S. Chetan Plastic Industries

Union Bank of India, versus Smt. Karanam Ramulamma