Allowed

Palthya Kalpana v. State Bank of India

DRT20 Jul 2023SA/76/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application against five respondents who had defaulted on an agricultural term loan. The court held that the bank established its claim through documentary evidence and awarded recovery of the principal sum, interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to jointly and severally pay Rs. 52,72,511/- with further interest at 8.60% p.a. Bank permitted to proceed against mortgaged and other properties for realization.

Palthya Kalpana versus State Bank of India — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 2OTH DAY OF JULY 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.76 of 2023

¶5

Between :

¶6

State Bank of India, Asset Recovery Management Branch (SARB-2), 1-B-563/1, RTC cross roads, Opp Sandhya theatre, 1't floor, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad - 500 020. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Smt Vaishali Padigela, w/o Sri Sachin Kumar Padigela, aged 53^years, female, H.No.4-2-341, Rani Sathiji Colony, Adilabad - 504 001.

¶10

Sri Sachin Padigela, S/o Mr. P. Dattatreya, Aged 53 years, Male, H.No.4-2-341, Rani Sathiji Colony, Adilabad - 504 001.

¶11

Sri Ganesh Padigela. S/o Mr. P. Dattatri, Aged 45 years, Male, H.No.4-2-341, Rani Sathiji *l

¶12

Colony, Adilabad - 504 001. ?VJ _.1 M,l

¶13

(OA.No.7612023)

¶14

Smt Kalpana Padigela, w/o Ganesh Padigela, aged major, female, H.No.4-2-341, Rani Sathiji Colony, Adilabad - 504 001.

¶15

Mr. Akshay Padigela, S/o Mr. Sachin Padigela, Aged 27 years, [Yale, H.No.4-2-341, Rani Sathiji Colony, Adilabad - 504 001. Defenda nts

¶16

Counsel for the Pa rties:

¶17

For the Applicant

¶18

For the Defendants

¶19

Sri C. Prabhakar Exparte

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.52,72,511/- (Rupees Fifty Two lakhs seventy two thousand Five Hundred and Eleven only) with further interest @ 8.60lo p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged properties as described in the schedule to OA.

¶22

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants availed Loan of Rs.1.00 crore for construction of Rural o$o*n:lt of arrangement dated

¶23

:- .r

¶24

(OA.No.7612023)

¶25

29.03.2019. To secure due repayment of agriculture term loan of Rs,1.00 crore, defendant no,1 executed hypothecation agreement dated 29.03.2019. Defendants No.2 to 5 stood as guarantors and executed deed of guarantee dated 29.03.2019 guaranteeing due repayment of aforesaid loan. To secure due repayment of aforesaid Agriculture Term loan of Rs.1.00 crore, defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage on 28.03.02019 by way of deposit of sale deed no.3936/2013 dated 30.05.2013 in respect of item no.1 of OA schedule property and sale deed no.3937/2013 dated 30,05.2013 in respect of item no.2 of OA schedule property. To secure due repayment of aforesaid agriculture term loan of Rs.1.00 Crore, defendants no.2 to 5 deposited their life insurance policies more fully described in the schedule II to OA. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and issued legal notice dated 06.02.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶26

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 21.04.2Q23.

¶27

;-' 2o rutm
=)}
W

¶28

(oA. No.7612023)

¶29

Sri R. Venkateswara Rao, Deputy Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.21.

¶30

Heard the L,d. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶31

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?

¶32

The defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1 who is the official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.21. 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.

¶33

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

¶34

The Defendants No.1to 5 are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of. 11/- (Rupees Fifty Two lakhs seventy two thqusirit r:<sup>I .five!.*:' and Eleven only) i-:: >

.'(*. JUm a {)

.1ts/ '/-"/7r.,/i'

(OA.No.7612023)

with further interest @ B.60lo p.a from date of application till the date

¶39

of rea lization.

¶40

i) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of its dues.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶46

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2oth day of luly, 2023) (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICEROFFICER ffi

¶47

sd/_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICEROFFICER

¶48

-M,

¶49

: 2o r$m -iii
.W6#

Palthya Kalpana v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palthya Kalpana v. State Bank of India

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

State Bank of India versus Sri.Taraka Rama Industries

State Bank of India versus Mr . Ramesh Madhuri

State Bank of India versus M S Kavyasri Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Rama Krishna Industries

K Raghuram Reddy versus Vijaya Bank

State Bank of India versus Smt. Potta Balamani