Allowed

State Bank of India v. Kumari

DRT18 Jul 2023OA/366/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ordered for request proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the applicant Bank sought recovery of a loan sum overdue from two defendants. The bank established its case through witness examination and documentary evidence. The Tribunal held the bank's claim established, declaring the defendants jointly liable for the principal, compound interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Direct order for recovery of Rs. 22,31,257/- with future interest @ 11.55% and @ 18.25% along with costs of the order.

State Bank of India versus Kumari — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBT$ RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DITTED THISTHE 18IIi DAY OF JULY 2023

¶2

trllESENT: $RI GUMMADI GOpICHAND, pRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

()4.No.366 OF 2022

¶4

Between:

¶5

Stat<: Bank of India, Stres;:;e d Assets tlecovery []ntrrch, 2"d floor, l-SRTC^(.ornmuter Arnerrity Centnr, 13r.rs tern rin;il conr;:lcx, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Reprc:s,:nted by its Chief Managcr

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VETISI.J:;

¶8

Snrt Kumari Muddasu, [/o M. Dibbarahi, erqr:rt 35 years, F::nrale, ll.I'rlo.2B- 195, lrrdira nagar, Nandyal, Kurrrool dist 5jU 502, Andhra Prarlesh. I\ obile No.99(;65616t;9

¶9

Sri LJ.^(lharrdra Kuntar, s^/o devadanilrn, ag<:tJ ]l) ycars, n rale, R/o Bornmala Satrarr, Nandyzrl, l(urrrool dist, A.p.

¶10

Defe nd a nts

¶11

:il:i::::;:'.i?{m-h,''\i c. Prabhakar
t, )
For the [)c.fendarrl-s'r!; -- : Expa rte
; 1BJutrn r
,.1,^4. ""s?i
Wsry

¶12

(oA. No.366/2022)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

t he Applicant Bank tiled the present OA against Defendants for lrcovery of a total s;um of RS.Z2,Zt,2S7l- (Rupees Twenty Two lakhs Seventy one thousand two hundred and Fifty seven only) i.e., a:;urrr of Rs.17,38,961/- with further interest @ l1.55o/o 1:.a with monthly rcsts and a sum of Rs.5,32,296/- with ilrther irrtelest (0r lB.25ol, with monthly rests from the date of rpplication till the date of realization.

¶15

/,!; per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants No.l. and 2 availed cash credit loan of Rs.4.75 lakhs arrd term lo.rn of Rs. t9.00 lakhs totaling to Rs.23.75 lakhs through l,itter of arrangement datod 29.06.20202. To secure due repayment c f aforesaicl cash <:reclit and term loans, the defendant no.1 executed iglreemenL of' loan curn hypothecation dated 29.06.2020. Defendant r o.2 executed guarantee agreement dated 29.06.2020 guaranteeing the due rerpayment of aforesaid loan amount. After availing the loan frcilities, the defenclants failed to comply the terms of sanction, t ence the applicant bank was ped to classify the account as ll[:A and issued leq.rl hX, Inspite of severat requests and demands, tllE defen did'6\tear the outstanding. *

¶16

I l(rnce th is OA. ' 1 I J|JL 702t

¶17

{OA.^No.366/2022)

¶18

[)efendants were called absent and set exparte on 07.06..2023.

¶19

S;ri Satrya Prasad, Ma.ager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as /,W.1 and exhibited rclevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 t) A.9.

¶20

tleard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶21

t he point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is ( ntitled for the claim rnade in the oA against the Defendants as p rayed for?

¶22

7 ' 'l he defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1 who is the official of the /,pplicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as I x.A1 to A.9. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has e stablished their clairn made in the oA against the Defendants and t ence the Applicant [lank is entitred to recover the claim made in the OA with future interesl and costs.

¶23

B. costs, as u nder:
In the result, the ",f"&\A
**, /,I lE JU2m :
'hsir,l#

¶24

(OA. No.366/2022 )

¶25

I he Defendants No.I and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay to :lre Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.22,7L,257l- (Rupees Twenty fwo lakhs Seventy one thousand two hundred and Fifty seven only) i.e., a sunr of Rs.17,39,961/- with Further interest @ 11.55% p.a and a sum of Rs.5,32,296/- with further interest @ IB.25o/o f ronr the date of applicationtill the date of realization.

¶26

i) The applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

[:;sue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶30

(:ommunicate a copy of the order to the pa rties concerned.

¶31

(Drct. tcd t by hcr, corrccled, signed and pronounced by me in the open
CoLrrt on \ 202:l )
,'4.
sd/_
,*
Hq
t
(G. GOPTCHAND)
JlJt Zm
PRESIDING OFFICER

¶32

State Bank of India v. Kumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Kumari

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Puja Plastic Industry

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Dinesh Electronics

Shri Pandit So Dattarao Sarnaik versus Motilal Oswal Home Finande Ltd.

Neha Gupta versus Hdfc Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.

Ms Sanatan Logistics Pvt. Ltd. versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Satya Inc.