The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Order Application for recovery of a defaulted term loan and costs against the defendants, who were absent.
Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 1,03,31,973/- with 14.4% p.a. interest; Applicant entitled to costs, proceeds against properties, and issue of recovery certificate.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER' 2024
PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER OA.No.158 ol 2024
Between:
state Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2no floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 5OO 095. Represented by its Chief Manager
Applicant
VERSUS
Counsel for the pa rties:
For the Applicant
For the Defendants
(oA.No.158/2024)
ORDER
1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,O3,31,973l_ (Rupees One Crore Three Lakhs Thirty one Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy Three only) with further interest @ l4.4Oo/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of oA till the date of realization and in defaurt for sare of movabre property as described in the schedure to oA.
2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 as its proprietrix availed term loan of Rs.95.00 lakhs vide retter of arrangement dated 24.03.2023. To secure due repayment of term loan, the defendants executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 24.03.2023. To secure due repayment, the defendant no.1 hypothecated all its movable assets more fully described in the schedure to oA. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants failed to comply the terms oF sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA and issued legal notice of several requests and demands, the outstanding. Hence this OA.
(oA.No.1s8/2024)
himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are
marked as Ex.A.1 to A.6.
entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as
prayed for?
B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a tota 1...fu6;,9f ;i$.-qBs,a r,s7 3 / _ (Rupees One Crore Three La Hundred and is;;ffi"i@q,o ","" -og !:..'*.'j.r,nr .i ,
(OA. No.1s8/2024)
Seventy Three only) with further interest @ l4.4oo/o p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;
and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.
sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER
0 r il0vm
TBUC COPY-I LY P.d^-a:-"---/au -lt L</sup> tsst- Rcg6rrLr DRT.I, HYDERABf.D.
State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch
M/s. Yesh Fitness and Studio
Mrs. G. Vijayalaxmi
Gummadu Gopichand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
