Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. v Subramanyam

DRT15 Jun 2023OA/372/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Originating Application for recovery of a term loan. Finding the defendant absent, the Tribunal held that the bank substantiated its case through documentary evidence and ordered the sale of mortgaged and hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.31,46,680 plus interest at 15.50% p.a. from the date of application until realization, along with costs of the proceedings.

State Bank of India versus Sri. v. Subramanyam — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE'2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.372 OF 2022

¶5

Between :

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TS RTC Bus Terminal Complex (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti, Hyderabad. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri V. Subramanyam, s/o Perumallu Chetty, major, male, R/o Kukkalapalli village and post, Yadamari Mandal, Chittoor district - 577 422. Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Parties:

¶11

For the Applicant Shri P.V, Satyanarayana

¶12

For the Defendant Ex pa rte

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total surn of Rs.31,46,6907Rupees Thirty One a ** 15ilJN7m ? 6^j '-1i d. ^*a$l tlitqoffiiin *

¶15

(OA.No.372/2022)

¶16

Lakhs Forty Six thousand Six hundred and Eighty only) with interest @ 15.50o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property and hypothecated assets as described in the schedules^.'A & B,, to OA.

¶17

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed agricultural term loan of Rs.20.00 lakhs on 08.02.2016 and the defendant executed necessary security loan documents in favour of Applicant Bank vide arrangement letter dated 08.02.2016. The defendant executed hypothecation agreement dated 08.02.2016 and mortgage deed on 08.02.2016 in favour of Applicant bank against the OA schedule mentioned property vide regd Mortgage deed no.673/20L6 for securing repayment of outstanding liability. After availing the loan facility, the defendant falled to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and issued legal notice dated 01.11.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶18

Defendant was called absent and set exparte on 25.04.2023.

¶19

<br>Jljll 7IM
2

¶20

(OA.No.372/20221

¶21

shri P. Madhav Rao, Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himserf as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.B.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

6' 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?

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

The Defendant Bank a total

¶27

Rs,31,46,68O/Six thousand

¶28

(oA.No.372/20221

¶29

Six hundred and Eighty only) with interest @ 15.50o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶30

i) The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property (immovable) and hypothecated assets (movable) as described in schedules "A & B" to the oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

iv) 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 l5thday of June, 2023)

¶37

sd/-
(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

rRUE .GOPJ
f sst RegYstrar ( q lU<br>Dp_r-t #yDEpr Rlrr'li- ',2

State Bank of India v. Sri. v Subramanyam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. v Subramanyam

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

Shoukath Ali versus South Indian Bank

Santhosh Kumar Nair Mn versus Hdfc Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Nivedita Das Lahon

Mr Subodh Chandra Bairagi versus Central Bank of India

Indian Overseas Bank versus Folis Allied Core Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Ltz Enterprise