Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Datla Srinivas Raju

DRT9 Oct 2024OA/136/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's Order Application for recovery of Rs. 34,06,249/- along with interest, holding the Defendants jointly and severally liable, and directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 34,06,249/- with interest @ 10.9% p.a.; Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged and other properties; Recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Datla Srinivas Raju — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.135 ol 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC, CAC, Koti, Hyderabad, Telangana State

¶7

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Mr.Datla Srinivas Raju, S/o Sri Maheswararaju,

¶11

aged 36 years, occ: Pvt employee, Flat no.F4, Satya Towers, Rajivgandhi Nagar, Bachupally, Hyderabad - 500 090.

¶12

And also at

¶13

Flat no.303, 3'd floor, "Spring Valley", Plot no.74, Bachupally village and mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiridist- 500 090,

¶14

Mrs.DatlaGayathri,

¶15

w/o Datla Srinivas Raju, aged 29 years, occ: housewife, Flat no.F4, Satya Towers, Rajivgandhi Nagar, Bachupally, Hyderabad - 500 090.

¶16

And also at

¶17

Flat no.303, 3'd floor, "Spring Valley", Plot no.74,

¶18

:, * 0[i Tt?<br>

¶19

(oA. No.136/2024)

¶20

Bachupally village and mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiridist- 500 090.

¶21

Defendants

¶22

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Smt B. Ramana Kumari

Expa rte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.34,06,249l- (Rupees Thirty Four Lakhs Six thousand Two hundred and Forty Nineonly) (Rs.30,16,5461- + Rs.69,364l- + Rs.3,20,339/-) with current and future interest @ 10.9olo^p.awith monthly^rests from^04.4.2024 till the date of realization and in default^{for sale} of^mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA'

¶29

As per the averments in the application,^{the ApplicantBankstates} that defendant No.1 and² are^{wife and husbandavailed housing loan} of Rs.32.00 lakhs^{vide letter} of^{arrangementdated 13.08.2019.The} defendants created equitable mortgage of^{schedule mentioned} property in favour of the Applicant bank. The defendants deposited the original Regd Sale deed Doc.No. 19337 l2Ol9 dated 19.08.2019 registered SRO, Quthbullapur. Subsequently the defend6nts^a ho[s$, toO up loan of Rs.3,20,000/- on 08. bozil^{SogU. &!,r,} e loan facility, the '\tt,"""$, s;ffig

¶30

(oA. No.136/2024)

¶31

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 t4.03.2024. Inspite of several^requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding.^Hence this OA.

¶32

Defendants No.1 and 2 called absent and^{set exparte on 23.09'2024.} , Sri Manjul Dixit, Manager of^{the ApplicantBank examined himself as} AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents,^{which are markedas} Ex.A.1to A.17.

¶33

Heard the Ld, Counsel for the Applicant^Bank.

¶34

The^point that arise^{for consideration is whether the ApplicantBank is} entitled for the claim^{made in} the^{OA against the Defendantsas} prayed for?

¶35

Defendants 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.A1to A'17'In} view of the above, I^{hold that the Applicant Bank has established} their claim made in the^{OA agai} ndants and hence the e in the OA with

¶36

Applicant Bank is^entitledto future interest and costs. * oCI mt

¶37

I^oe

¶38

(oA.No.135/202a)

¶39

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.34,O6,249/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lakhs Six thousand Two hundred and Forty Nine only) (Rs.30,16,546/- + Rs,69,364/- + Rs.3,2o,33gl-) with current and future interest @ 10.9olo p.a from 04.4.2024 till the date of realization;

¶40

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and^properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

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

¶43

t2. The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

t4. copy of the order to the parties concerned.
by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by by me
7O24)
IF
,t*
(G. GOPTCHAND)
1,I i :i osoclmt r''IT PRESIDING
i t; . _os,
i :it.q
rr.s?' k*xMW r<br>

¶46

by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by by me in the open

¶47

7O24)

¶48

sdl-

¶49

(G. GOPTCHAND)

¶50

PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Mr. Datla Srinivas Raju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Datla Srinivas Raju

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

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Mr. Degala Prabhudas

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Adepu Anuradha

Canara Bank versus Mr. M. Shiva Prasad

State Bank of India versus Maruthi Super Stores

Sri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal versus Icici Bank Limited

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Technologies Pvt. Ltd.