Allowed

State Bank of India v. Miss Devunuri Alisha

DRT7 Aug 2023OA/269/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of loan dues against the defendant, the sole legal representative of deceased parents who were the original borrowers. The Debt Tribunal held that the defendant is liable to pay the outstanding loan amount with interest and future interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs.53,86,804/- with future interest; Applicant entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and defendant's estate.

State Bank of India versus Miss Devunuri Alisha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.269 ol 2O22

¶3

Between i

¶4

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

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Miss Devunuri Alisha, D/o Late Sridhar and Srivani, Aged about 23 years, Occ: student, H.No.4-3-103l1, Koth u r Zanda, Near Hanuman Temple, Hanmakonda district- 506 OO1.

¶8

Defe nda nt

¶9

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendant

Sri Y. Aravind

Expa rte

0t r{r4^&

(oA.No.269 of 2022)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.53,86,8O4l- (Rupees Fifty three lakhs Eighty Six thousand Eight hundred and four only) i.e., a sum of Rs.53,01,968/- in home loan & Rs.84,836/- in Surakha account) wlth future interest @ 9.350/o p,a with monthly rests and 2o/o p.a penal interest from 19.07.2022 ttl the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the parents of defendant namely Devunuri Srivani and Devunuri Sridhar availed home loan of Rs.48.00 lakhs and Suraksha coverage of Rs.1,20,000/-. To secure repayment of said loan amounts, the parents of defendant executed home loan application dated 05,07.2016, arrangement letter dated t4,O7.2OL6 and memorandum of loan agreement for home loan granted to public dated 14,07.2016. The mother of defendant purchased the property through Regd Sale deed document no.2B72/201Q_,da!e_d I4,O7.2016 and created an -1"'-.;,' . +-' equitable mortgage of sched6i6.[.tgpV.lrfuuour of appticant bank '.-,'- S.,..i. on 27.07.2Ot6 by depostt of origtffat titld?\ds. After availing the ,z -- 'i ,i.? ',\O^0rtm&3 z :jj^.i t<sup>-rr- . ..' \u' - ) ^ - .J," .-" :,

¶19

(OA.No.269 of 2022)

¶20

loan facility, the parents of defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 08.06.2021 and issued demand notice dated 08.03.2022. Subsequently legal notice dated 13.12.2021 was issued on behalf of applicant bank which was returned unserved due to death of parents of defendant. The defendant who is only daughter of Smt Devunuri Srivani and Sri Devunuri Sridhar jointly availed home loan and died leaving the defendant to succeed and inherit their estate as their sole legal representative. Hence this OA.

¶21

Defendant was called absent and set exparte on 07.03.2023.

¶22

Shri Ganji Prasad, chief Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.13.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Appricant Bank IS

¶25

¶26

(OA.No.269 of 2022)

¶27

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.13, 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.

¶28

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

¶29

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total Rs.53,86,8O4l- (Rupees Fifty three lakhs Eighty Six thousand Eight hundred and four only) i.e., a sum of Rs.53,01,968/- in home loan & Rs.84,836/- in Surakha account) with future interest @ 9.35o/o p.a from 19.07.2022il| the date of realization.

¶30

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

¶31

ii) However, the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant only to the extent of estate devolved upon her from deceased p.arents towards realization of the

¶32

iii)

¶33

01.iltrm Qr?ffi'

¶34

(OA.No.269 of 2022)

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 7th day of August, 2023)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

0r fifizm

:m,,,

State Bank of India v. Miss Devunuri Alisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Miss Devunuri Alisha

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

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Amani

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Satyanarayana Reddy

Bank of India versus Shashi Pet Industries

Union Bank of India versus M/S Sree Rama Cement Bricks

Union Bank of India versus M/S Mahateja Industries

Union Bank of India versus Sri. Monagari Laxmi Narayana (Died)