Allowed

State Bank of India, v. M/S. Fortune Aparels

DRT24 Jan 2024OA/118/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of a loan of Rs.64.32 lakhs plus interest. The court held the bank established its claim against the borrowers and partners, ordered realization of hypothecated assets, and made the attachment order absolute.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.64,32,77/- with interest; realization of hypothecated assets; personal properties attached; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India, versus M/S. Fortune Aparels — DRT (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24thDAY OF JANUARY' 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.118 of 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Assets Recovery Management Branch, (ARMB), Opp Sandhya Theatre, RTC cross roads, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad - 500 020. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Fortune Apparels, A partnership firm, represented By its partners the defendants 2 and 3 herein

¶10

L-B-229/1,3'd floor, Rudram towers,^p.G. Road, Sindhi colony, Secunderabad - 500 003.

¶11

Sri Jonnalagadda Krishna Mohan, s/o Sri J. Krishna Murthy, aged about 57 years, occ: business and partner of 1't defendant firm

¶12

flat no.412, 4th floor, RV AADHVIK Apartments, Pipe Line road, Jeedimetla, Subhashnagar, Hyderabad g'.,:"'"^{-ft-'t'A'^} li lt -,i 7 r^,{i-^ ^^^-- H.No.12-10-665, Road noili' , ,1 J' ,r:l ?n?1 .r_:'i Indira nagar, Warasiguda; {' ) Secunderabad - 500 061ii :.: Y -li::t ,-) €{s

¶13

(OA.No.118 of 2023)

¶14

SmtGunduboina Annapurna, w/o Sri G. Sreekanth, female, aged about 48 years, occ: business and pa rtner of 1't defendant firm

¶15

Plot no.47 , sy. N o. 150, Shishir residency, Bank colony, Near Sadhu Vaswani school, Kompally, Secunderabad - 5OO 014.

¶16

¶17

H.No.1-8-205/1,^plot no.2\2, Green gates Apartments, PG road, Secunderabad - 500 OO3.

¶18

Defendants

¶19

Counsel for the^parties: For the Applicant For the Defendants 1& 2 Defendant no.3

¶20

: Sri G, PrabhakarSarma Sri K. Sitaram Exparte

¶21

ORDER

¶22

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.64,32,77gl- (Rupees Sixty four Lakhs Thirty Two thousand Seven hundred and Seventy Eight only) with interest @ L2.4Oo/op.a with monthly rests from the date of oA ti' the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated

¶23

movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶24

As per the averments

¶25

icant Bank states dants2and3are

¶26

(OA.No.118 of 2023)

¶27

its partners availedcash credit loan facility of Rs,60,OO lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated 17,02.201g. To secure due repayment of cash credit loan, the defendant no.1 firm executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation and executed guarantee agreement dated 77.02.20L8. The defendant no.1 firm represented by defendants 2 & 3 hypothecated all the stocks, finished and semi finished goods, equipments, current assets, book debts, receivables and other assets more fu'y described in the schedure to oA. After avairing the roan facility, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 2t.02.2023. Inspite of several reguests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶28

Ld counsel for Defendants 1 and 2 filed vakalath but not filed Written

¶29

statement. Defendant no,3 called absent and set exparte on

¶30

12.12.2023.

¶31

Shri O. Muralidhar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself

¶32

as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as

¶33

Ex,A.1 to A.11,

¶34

5, Heard the Ld.

¶35

(OA.No.118 of 2023)

¶36

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?

¶37

Counsel for Defendants No.1 & 2filed vakalath but not filed Written Statement. Defendant no.3 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.11, 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 entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶38

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

¶39

The Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.64,32,7791- (Rupees Sixty four Lakhs Thirty Two thousand Seven hundred and Seventy Eight only) with interest @ 12.40o/op.a from the date of OA till the date of realization;

¶40

The Applicant bank is Hypothecated movables as described rea lizatio n of the debt due.

¶41

(OA.No.118 of 2023)

¶42

the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶43

The order of attachment in IA.No.630/2023 and 63L/2023 dated 27.03.2023 in respect of petition schedules^.A & B" properties is made absolute. Include the said properties in the Recovery Certificate.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶48

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 24thday of )an,2124)

¶49

sdl(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶50

hf's:fr?X*{ Assl,^Regrsfrar DRT.I,^HYlERAAAD.

State Bank of India, v. M/S. Fortune Aparels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India, v. M/S. Fortune Aparels

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

Indian Bank versus M/S.M.D.P. Transports

Smt Aluvala Kalyani versus Bank of India

Indian Bank versus M/S. S.V. Logistics

Punjab National Bank versus Garmidi Hanumantha Rao

State Bank of India versus Sri Bandarapu Ramesh

Sri Pasumarthi Ashwin Kumar versus Bhadradri Co-Operative Urban Bank Limited