Allowed

Indian Bank v. Sri Sandrapalli Venkata Bipin Kumar

DRT29 Aug 2023OA/88/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.88 of 2023, the Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's claim for recovery of dues including principal and interest from the respondents, who were the borrower and a guarantor, based on default under a term loan. The order mandates payment and a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Jointly and severally pay Rs. 39,65,391/- plus interest at 7.40% p.a. from application date till realization; allow proceeding against mortgaged and personal properties; issue recovery certificate.

Indian Bank versus Sri Sandrapalli Venkata Bipin Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶3

OA.No.88 of 2023

¶4

Between :

¶5

Ind ia n Bank, Stressed Asset Management Branch, (SAM), Koti, Hyderabad. Telangana State. Represented by its authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri Sandrapalli Venkata Blpin Kumar, s/o S. Venkataiah, aged about 30 years, R/o 7-5L/E, lai Santosh nagar colony, Street no.B, Habsiguda, Hyderabad - 500 007.

¶9

Smt Kummari Kiranmaye, Female, W/o Sandrapalli Venkata Bipin Kumar, aged about 2g years, R/o 7-57/E, Jai Santosh nagar colony, Street no.B, Habsiguda, Hyderabad - 500 OO7.

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the pa rties:
For the Applicant ReddV
$.Damodar
For the Defendants #Aef'"-t
ffi$
ii: zs A1162oa
j,ir
'W,t#W

¶12

(oA.No.88/2023)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.39,65,391/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Sixty Five thousand Three hundred and Eighty One only) with interest @ 7.40o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the apprication, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant No.1 avaired term loan of Rs.36,50,000/- vide sanction letter dated 17.O3.ZOI7. Defendant no.2 stood as guarantor to the loan availed by defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 executed pronote dated 20,03.2017 for Rs.36,50,000/- and defendant no.2 executed deed of guarantee dated 20.03.2017 in favour of applicant bank. Defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage by deposit of origlnal title deeds i.e., sale deed dated 23.03.2017 bearing document no.2871 of 2077 on 27.03.2or7. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 01.01.2019 and issued demand notice on 10.1 of several requests and demands, the defend . Hence th is t-l"E / tu oA. i(: z s, rtrc zua

¶16

(oA.No.88/2023)

¶17

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 04.07.2O23.

¶18

Shri Dhandapani, Asst. general Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himserf as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A. 15.

¶19

5, Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶20

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶21

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as

¶22

prayed for?

¶23

The defendants were cared absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.l who is the official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.15. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their craim 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

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: 9. The Defendants are jointly pay to the Applicant Bank a totat sum * q!#, Thirty Nine Lakhs '* +' :. ?IAIJ62U3 i 'tu 3 ..; : .-: - .:.r .. l ',1..^t' :,ii--. ..:''.i-ir ,\r : ".I,;rr-1::ii -i,--..,;jt:*,;,i, !::.. .. " . ''i_.-=-:j,:,

¶25

(OA.No.88/2023)

¶26

Sixty Five thousand Three hundred and Eighty One only) with interest @ 7,4Oo/o p.a from date of application till realization.

¶27

i) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in the schedure to oA towards rearization of its dues.

¶28

ii) the Appricant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly,

¶32

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶33

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 29th day of Aug, 2023)

¶34

sdl(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶35

29llj82m

¶36

rRuE pCI.rY

Indian Bank v. Sri Sandrapalli Venkata Bipin Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Sri Sandrapalli Venkata Bipin Kumar

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

State Bank of India versus M/S. Vinayaka Polymers

Madhucon Infra Ltd. versus Ifci Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Raksha Ginning and Pressing Factory

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kamalla Stalin

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Dream House Cine Techniq

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Kirana and General