Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Geetha Enterprises

DRT6 Nov 2024OA/166/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by State Bank of India against proprietary concern representatives for recovery of loan dues totaling Rs. 80,18,055 along with interest and costs. The court held that the applicant was entitled to recover the claim and proceed against the defendants' properties.

What did the court decide?

Direct recovery of Rs. 80,18,055 with interest; authority to proceed against movable hypothecated properties; issuance of recovery certificate; logical total costs.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Geetha Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER'2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.165 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC Commuter Rmenity Centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Geetha Enterprises, Prop: V. Nagamani, Unit no.2, 3.d floor, food Court, GSM Mall, Madinaguda, Hyderabad - 500 050.

¶9

Mrs. V. Nagamani, Plot no.9, LNR colony, Dammaiguda, Nagaram, Hyderabad - 500 O5O.- 500 O5O.500 O5O.O5O.

¶10

Hyderabad - 500 O5O.- 500 O5O.500 O5O.O5O. Defendants
Counsel for the parties:
For the Applicant Sri C.
For the Defendants
Exparte
6 l{0lJ 7rp4
ORDER
vEtI{
1. The Applicant Bank filed
the present OA against Defendarits for
recovery of a total sum ofof a total sum ofa total sum oftotal sum ofsum ofof Rs.8O,18,O55/- (Rupees Eighty LakhsLakhs

¶11

recovery of a total sum ofof a total sum ofa total sum oftotal sum ofsum ofof Rs.8O,18,O55/- (Rupees Eighty LakhsLakhs Eighteen Thousand and Fifty Five only) i.e.,

¶12

(oA.166/2024)

¶13

A) A sum of Rs.2,24,O371- under Loan A/c. No.39795993935 with further interest @ 14.40o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of reallzation;

¶14

B) A sum of Rs.61,20,831/- under Loan A/c. No.38706379766 with further interest @ 15.35o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶15

C) A sum of Rs.8,19,079/- under Loan A/c. No.39419330345 with further interest @ 11.25olo p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶16

D) A sum of Rs.8,54,108/- under Loan A/c. No.401gg852464 with further interest @ 11.25% p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶17

and in default for sale of movable hypothecated property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶18

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 proprietor availedcash credit of Rs.45 lakhs through letter of arrangement dated 22.02.20L9. The cash credit was enhanced and also availed term loan and GECL loan of Rs.51.90 lakhs on 09.06.2020 and executed supprementar .agreement of roan cum hypothecation dated 09.06. ing limits

¶19

ier,\ \ dated

¶20

05.05.2021. To secure due re 6rlJ0rl6Jfl{ ,^the

¶21

fuh,,,*#;

¶22

(oA.766/20241

¶23

defendants hypothecated ail movabre property more fuily described in the schedule to oA. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 15.10.2023 and issued legal notice dated 04.04.2024, Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶24

3' Defendants No.1 and 2 ca[ed absent and set exparte on 07.L0.2024.

¶25

4' Sri P. sandeep, Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himserf as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.15.

¶26

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶27

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?

¶28

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.Al to A.15. In view of the above, I hotd that the apd)Kng ished their claim ,i'd\

¶29

:..*i.

¶30

i . ., 0 6 ilov ,02l
I

¶31

loA.L66/2024],

¶32

is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶33

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: 9. The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.80,18,055/- (Rupees Eighty Lakhs Eighteen Thousand and Fifty Five only) i.€.,

¶34

a) A sum of Rs.2,24,037/- under Loan A/c.^{No.39795993935 with} further interest @ 14.40olo^p.a from date of^filing of OA^{till the} date of realization;

¶35

b) A sum of Rs.61,20,831/- under^{Loan A/c. No.38706379766} with further interest @ 15.35%^{p.a from} date^{of filing of OA till} the date of realization;

¶36

c) A sum of Rs.8,19,079/- under Loan A/c. No.39419330345 with further interest @ 11.25olo P.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶37

d) A sum of Rs.8,54,108/- under Loan A/c. No.40188852464 with further interest @ 11.25%^p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶38

The Applicant bank is roceed against the movable property as described i ards realization of the debt due. *

,it.06il0vryf ,q

Wh--Y

(oA.766/2024],

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶46

Communicate a copy of the order^{to the parties concerned.}

¶47

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and^{pronounced by me in theopen} court on this the 6th day of^{Nov, 2024)}

¶48

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶49

o6l'lollzlnr I
W*#

State Bank of India v. M/S. Geetha Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Geetha Enterprises

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

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus Mr. B. Samuel

State Bank of India versus Mr. Eedara Venkatesh

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Mahaveer Soft Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Jaya Lakshmi Industries

State Bank of India versus M/s. Bairu Consultancy Services Private Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Jyothi Food Products