Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. Venkata Reddy Bommanapally

DRT25 Nov 2024OA/110/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT allowed SBIs original application for recovery of a housing loan. Debant failed to prove payments beyond bank statements. Bank was entitled to realize debt via mortgaged property and debt recovery procedure.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs.27,35,486/- with 8.55% future interest. Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property, person and properties of defendant. Recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Venkata Reddy… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER,2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶4

OA.No.11O ot 2022

¶5

Between:

¶6

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

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Venkata Reddy Bommanapally, S/o Sri Sammi Reddy, major, R/o H.no.10-6-44, flat no.403, Mayuri Residency, Mammilagudem. Khammam Dist - 507 001.

¶10

Also at:

¶11

Flat no.8-507, 4th floor in B block, "Prasad Heights" Apartments, Khanapuram (Haveli), Khammam dist - 507 318.- 507 318.507 318.318.

¶12

Khammam dist - 507 318.- 507 318.507 318.318. DeFendant Counsel for the Pa rties: - B /;.3'n-4q s For the Appricant ,'''.d" ,-r,H,r.narayana For derendant^T 2 [^:l,|0V 2Et,^,.dl]"n, .., -.fr :- 1. The Appticant Bank riteo ihlrpy0snlilA'against Defendants for .: : 1|!lil{ l.-.' recovery of a total sum of ni-.Zz;Sa;a;6/- (Rupees Twenty Seven

¶13

Lakhs Thirty Six Thousand Four hundred and Eighty Six only)

¶14

(oA. No.110/2022)

¶15

with future interest @8.55o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶16

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed housing loan for a sum of Rs.28.00 lakhs along with funding of Home loan insurance cover limit of Rs.2.00 lakhs totaling a sum of Rs.30.00 lakhs on 2t.03.20t7. The defendant executed Memorandum of term loan agreement for home loan granted to public dated 21.03.2017. The defendant deposited the title deeds bearing Regd Sale deed no.2279/2017 dated 23.03.2017 and created equitable mortgage (more fully described in the schedule to OA).

¶17

It is submitted by the Applicant bank that the Defendant having availed the said loan facilities failed to keep up the repayment schedule, as such the account was classified as NpA on 28.ll.2O2O and issued demand notice dated 15.06.2021 and legal notice dated 22.03.2022. Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendant had not regularized the account, and did not come forward to repay the same. The total claim of Applicant against defendant isRs.27,35,486/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs

¶18

Thirty Six Thousand Eighty Six only) with future interest @8. 5s%'16#- wit from date of filing of oA till the date of reatizarionz 5^{rilfffff" o&} i .t ir.^,

¶19

(oA.No.110/2022 )

¶20

The defendant fired written statement admitting that he availed housing loan from appricant bank and created mortgage in respect of schedule property. The defendant averred that he paid installments regularly and when the applicant bank initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act, he fired sA.No.76/2021 and he paid certain amounts in the said SA. As the defendant was regular in paying the EMI,s, prayed to dismiss the OA.

¶21

During the course of trial on behalf of Applicant Bank/ AW.1is examined buthis evidence was eschewed later AW.2 is examined and exhibits A.1 to A.11 are marked. Defendant examined himself as DW.1 and filed Ex.D.1 to D.4.

¶22

Both counsels submitted written arguments. I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶23

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶24

i) Whether the Applicant Bank is entiiled to recover the OA claim against the defendant ?

¶25

ii) To what relief ?

¶26

that he availed housing equitable mortgage of ry documents which are

¶27

(oA.No.110/2022)

¶28

exhibited by the applicant bank. The contention of defendant is that he paid the installments regularly and in the SA.No.7612021 also he paid certain amounts.

¶29

On behalf of the Applicant bank, AW.2, Sri A.G. Satyanarayanawho is working as Manager of Applicant Bank exhibited documents A.1 to A.11. AW.2 is cross examined by the counsel for defendant but nothing is elicited in the cross examination of AW.2 to dlscreet his testimony. Even though the defendant examined himself as DW.1 his evidence is no way helpful to the defendant for establishing that he paid some more amounts which are not reflected in the statement of account filed by the Applicant Bank. If really the defendant paid some other amounts which are not reflected in the statement of account, the defendant can establish the same by filing the necessary receipts issued by the Applicant Bank. But no such receipts are filed by the defendant. Even as per the statement of account filed by the defendant which is exhibited as D.1, the defendant is liable to pay the OA claim.

¶30

B. In the circumstances, I hold that the applicant bank established OA amountclaimed by that the defendant is J!*ffiq.lhe Applicant Bank. is EffieO in favour of the Applicant bank. Th$bfore, tfidon claim,d&erves to be allowed i ,: ? ir iilll ,07[ against the defendant.^'

¶31

. ^^F. ':-. "l/-!',i ..... _*. ,.-:-. "it.+-l'..,:r.// ...=- .. . 4'.,'-.., .-',.- i ':"-Jl :fs1; '.-' -\il"--i=,

¶32

(oA.No.110 /2022)

¶33

Point No.ii)

¶34

In the result, the present Original application is allowed with costs as under:

¶35

The Defendantis liable to Applicant Bank a total^sum Rs.27,35 r'.86/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs^{Thirty Six} Thousand Four hundred and Eighty Six only)^{with future} interest @8.55o/o p.a from date of^{filing of OA till the date of} realization.

¶36

The applicant bank is entitled to^{proceedagainst the mortgaged} property as described in schedule to OA.

¶37

the Applicant Bank is also^{entitled to proceed against the person} and^properties of defendant^{towards realization of the debt due.}

¶38

t2. The Applicant Bank^{is entitled to the costs of the OA.}

¶39

13, The Applicant shall file a^{cost memowithin two weeks from the} date of receiPt of order.

¶40

Issue Recovery certificate^accordingly.

¶41

communicate a copy of^{the orderto the parties concerned.}

¶42

in the open

¶43

,,ffi\day of Nov, 2024)
r._ .i 4t 2silol,zrru &*. Ij1i,
,*t .tt+ ii
t,. . .'t-'.. *{ '
t

¶44

sdl -

¶45

,-13;!,i3':li:il

¶46

TRUE COPY
n h..--- LJ'
'i*:i,?:?tr"':' -, %-/,r /* *

State Bank of India v. Sri. Venkata Reddy Bommanapally

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. Venkata Reddy Bommanapally

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

Aster Private Limited versus Idbi Bank

Aster Private Limited versus Idbi Bank

Bank of Baroda versus BBs Kesana Foods

State Bank of India versus M/S. Karigar Home Comforts

State Bank of India versus Mr. Gumbarthi Jaya Babu

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Nelapati Hemalatha