Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. T. Madhava Rao High Power Crushers Pvt. Ltd.

DRT2 Jul 2024OA/187/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India to recover a principal sum of approximately Rs. 6.27 crores along with interest from the borrowers and guarantors, with an entitlement to proceed against mortgaged assets and issue a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 6,27,97,314/- with future interest; Applicant Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged assets, properties of defendants and issue Recovery Cert

State Bank of India versus M/S. T. Madhava Rao High Power… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I^{AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY' 2fJ24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING^OFFICER OA.No.t87 of 2023

¶3

Between:

¶4

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

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. T. Madhava Rao High Power Crushers Pvt Ltd., Represented by its Director Sri T. Madhava Rao, office At: H.No.l2-B-452 & 453/5, TMR complex, Opp Rail Kalyan, Mettuguda, Secunderabad, Telangana State - 500 017.

¶8

Also at

¶9

Factory at : Sy.No.130, Malyala village, Bommalaramaram Mandal, Nalgonda dist-508 126.

¶10

Also at:

¶11

Gayatri Arcade, street no.3, Plot no.203, West MaredPallY, Secunderabad - 500 006.

¶12

Also at:

¶13

H.No. 2-7 -321, Excise colonY, Hanamkonda, Warangal-506 002.

¶14

(OA.No.187 of 2023l.

¶15

Sri T. Madhava Rao, S/o Narasinga Rao, aged 62 years, Male, H.Nop.2-7 -321, Excise colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal - 506 002.

¶16

Smt T. Sujatha, w/o Sri T. Madhavarao, aged major, female,

¶17

H.No.2-7-321,Excise colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal - 506 002.

¶18

Defendants

¶19

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Sri C. Prabhakar

Sri T. Sridhar Reddy

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against^{Defendants for} recovery of a total sum of Rs.6,27,97,314l-^{(RupeesSix Crores} Twenty Seven Lakhs Ninety Seven thousand^{Three hundred} and Fourteen only) i.e.,

¶26

a) A sum of Rs.2,81,74,774/- under^{Loan account No'62125459983} withfurther interest @ 17.25o/o^p.a with monthly^{rests from the} date of filing of OA till the date of^realization;

¶27

b) A sum of Rs.2,82,54,561/- under^{Loan account No'40249028378}

¶28

with further interest @ 17.25o/o^p_ nthly rests from the

¶29

date of filing of OA till the d

¶30

(OA.No.187 of 2023)

¶31

c) A sum of Rs.63,67,979/- under Loan account No.40257291179 with further interest @ 16.10o/o p.a with monthly rests from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶32

and in default for sale of hypothecated assets and^mortgaged immovable^properties as described in the^{schedules"I to III" to} oA.

¶33

As per the averments in the application,^{the ApplicantBankstates} that defendant No.1 is the^{principalborrower, defendants 1 & 2 are} mortgagors and defendants 2 & 3^{stoodas guarantors availed term} loan facility of Rs.14,90,00,000/-^{. The defendantno'1 executed the} following loan documents on^24.05'2008'

¶34

a) Form C-1 - Agreement^{of loan for overalllimit}

¶35

b) Form C-2 -^{Agreement of hypothecation of goods and assets} cj Form C-5 - Letter^{regarding grantof individuallimits within the} Overall limit.

¶36

To secure due repayment of^{aforesaid term loan of Rs'14'90} lakhs, defendant no.1^{company createdprimary chargeby way of} hypothecation of all movable assets^{more fully describedin OA} schedule - L The^{defendants 2 & 3 executed deed of guarantee} dated 24.05.2008.^{To securedue repaymentof aforesaidterm loan} of Rs.14,90,00,000/-,^{defendantno'1 created equitable mortgageon} 26.05.2008 by waY of^dePosit no.13009/2006 dated 27.os.2oo4 in respect "frFffi.f.ruTffirr.^{rhe Applicant} bank reneweo tn" u,i,fne-'til :ff #, ,t\r.,00,000/and './,, \. . --,- . -,1 ]..

¶37

(OA.No.187 of 2023)

¶38

sanctioned cash credit limit of Rs.3,50,00,000/- and bank guarantee limit of Rs.1,50,00,000/- on 05.03.2010. On 05.03.2010, the defendant no.1 executed the following loan documents:

¶39

a) Form C.1-A - Supplemental agreement of loan for increase in overall limit

¶40

b) Form C.2-A - supplemental agreement of hypothecation of goods and assets for increase in the overall limit

¶41

c) Form C-5- letter regarding grant of individual limits within the overall limit.

¶42

On 28.09.2013, the Applicant bank sanctioned adhoc cash credit (hypothecation) limit of Rs.50.00 lakhs for procurement of diesel, labour payments and machinery maintenance etc. To secure due repayment the loan facilitles aggregating to Rs.1,83,00,000/-, the defendant no.1 executed various loan documents. The Applicant bank renewed and enhanced the cash credit limit from Rs.150.00 lakhs to Rs.500.00 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 01.10.2016. The defendants 2 & 3^jointly executed^guarantee agreement dated 06.04.2018 guaranteeing the due repayment of Rs.5.07^crores. After availing the loan facilities, the 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 04.05.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear^the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶43

Ld. Counsel for th but not filed written

¶44

statement.

¶45

,*
0 ? JUL 21nt |qT

¶46

(OA.No.187 of 2023)

¶47

Sri DhanunjayaPanda, Manager of the Applicant^{Bank examined} himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents,^{which are} marked as Ex.A.l to A.51.

¶48

Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bank'}

¶49

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

¶50

Ld counsel for defendants^{filed vakalath but not filed WS'To} substantiate the case of^{the Applicant Bank, AW.1,official of the} Applicant Bank was^{examinedand he exhibited relevantdocuments} as Ex.A1 to A.51. In^{view of the above, I hold that the Applicant} Bank has established their^{claimmade in the OA against the} Defendants and hence the^{Applicant Bankis entitled to recoverthe} claim made in the OA^{with futureinterest and costs.}

¶51

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

¶52

The Defendants are^jointly and severally^{liable to pay to the} total sum of Rs.6,27,97P141-^(RupeesSix

¶53

Applicant Bank^a Seven thousand Three

¶54

Crores TwentY

¶55

hundred and Fou

¶56

(OA.No.187 of 2023)

¶57

a) A sum of Rs.2,81,74,7741- under Loan account

¶58

No.62125459983 with further interest @ L7.25o/o^{p.a from the} date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶59

b) A sum of Rs.2,82,54,561/- under Loan^account No.40249028378 with further interest @^{17.25o/o p.a s from} the date of filing of OA till the date^{of realization;}

¶60

c) A sum of Rs.63,67,979l- under^{Loan accountNo'40257291t79} with further interest @ 16.10o/o^{p.a from the date of filing of OA} till the date of realization;

¶61

The Applicant bank is entitled^{to proceed against the hypothecated} assets and mortgaged^{propertiesas described in schedule to OA} towards realization of the^{debt due'}

¶62

The Applicant^{Bankis also entitled to proceed againstthe person} and properties of defendants^{No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant} no.1 firm.

¶63

The Applicant Bank^{is entitledto the costs of the OA.}

¶64

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

¶65

or receipt or order. %,$*ii,l\ ii',# H^"u

¶66

Issue Recovery^{certififtate uTold,11fl,r2pt} :

¶67

(OA.No.187 of 2023\

¶68

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶69

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2"d day of )uly, 2024)

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

02J&2ml

i*ffiffi+''"

DRT.I, HYDERA?,T.1:.

State Bank of India v. M/S. T. Madhava Rao High Power Crushers Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. T. Madhava Rao High Power Crushers Pvt. Ltd.

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

Canara Bank versus Siri Bassi Mangal Singh

Canara Bank versus Smt. Mali Surekha

Central Bank of India versus Smt. Banothu Sunitha

Canara Bank versus Sri Bassi Indhal Singh

Canara Bank versus Smt. Seetha Bai

Canara Bank versus Sri Balla