Allowed

State Bank of India v. M S Kavyasri Enterprises

DRT19 Jul 2023OA/314/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's arbitration/objection application against a firm and its proprietor for recovery of dues classified as NPA, including principal, interest, and costs against person and properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay principal and interest; bank entitled to recover from hypothecated assets, personal and firm properties; costs awarded to the Applicant.

State Bank of India versus M S Kavyasri Enterprises — Company and Corporate | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.314 OF 2022

¶5

Between :

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC bus terminal complex, (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti, Hyderabad. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s, Kavyasri Enterprises, Represented by its Proprietor Sri Bandi Shekar, S/o B. Balaiah, Aged major, male, Sy,No.53/A, Manneguda "X" roads, Manneguda, Bongloor, Turkayamjal Municipality, Ranga Reddy district - 501 510.

¶10

Sri Bandi Shekar, s/o B. Balaiah, aged major, male, R/o H.Ni,7 -722, Ragannaguda, Manneguda "X" roads, Ma nneguda, K.V. Rangareddy district - 501 510, Defenda nts

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

For the Applicant tya narayana
For the Defendants

¶13

(OA.No.314/2022)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2G,35,577l_ (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Thirty Five thousand Five hundred and Seventy Seven only) i.e., a sum of Rs.2,44,7L3/_ for CC loan and a sum of Rs.23,90,864/- for term loan limit with interest @ 11.90olo p.a with monthry rests from date of apprication tiil the date of rearization and in default for sare of hypothecated assets as described in the schedure to OA.

¶16

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant No.2 is the proprietor of defendant no.1 company availed cash credit rimit of Rs.2.00 rakhs and term roan rimit of Rs'21'00 rakhs on 26.04.202r. the defendants executed necessary security loan documents or securing the repayment of outstanding liability. The defendants executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 26.04.202L in favour of appricant bank. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank _Was constrained to classify the account as NpA ".0 ,.rr"gLeo#T'fu\ 7.0s.2022. rnspite

¶17

(OA.No.314/2022)

¶18

of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 25.04.2023.

¶20

Sri Harindranath, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.6.

¶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

The defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Appricant Bank, AW.1 who is the officiar of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.6. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶24

.a,- .

¶25

B. In the result, the present on iq_,dltoweJ$1.o.tr, as under:
\l
\l
, 4'O rri ryrn ll
,,a lgJUm "ll
Ah-;--#/

¶26

(OA.No.314/2022)

¶27

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.26,35,577/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Thirty Five thousand Five hundred and Seventy Seven only)

¶28

i.e., a sum of Rs.2,44,713/- for CC loan and a sum of Rs.23,90,864/- for term loan limit with interest @ 11.90o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization till the date of realization.

¶29

i) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated assets as described in the schedule to oA towards realization of its dues.

¶30

ii) The applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery certificate a ccord 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
'"]9rr3it'tlo,t' July,2023)
i/4- W
sd/-
i/t* e$
* (G. GOPtcHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
'--' 'a 19 JU[A
-l
' TR[.JE S,sE4r'lCOPY
,qssa nY6rrar(l/ 9
",rt ' +.,nfFAg-6D- -

State Bank of India v. M S Kavyasri Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M S Kavyasri Enterprises

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

M/S. Mallikarjuna Purified Water Plant, versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S. Karigar Furnitures

Bank of India versus Mr. Gali Vijaya Krishna

State Bank of India versus Sri.Taraka Rama Industries

State Bank of India versus Mr . Ramesh Madhuri

State Bank of India versus Rama Krishna Industries