Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr . M Venkatesh

DRT3 Oct 2024OA/191/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal at Hyderabad allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of a loan amount of Rs.28,31,074/- with interest and future interest against absent defendants who were jointly liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.28,31,074/- with future interest at 13.80% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Mr . M Venkatesh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrs rHE 3RD DAy oF ocroBER, 20.24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.191 ol2024

¶4

Between :

¶5

State Bank of India, SARB-II, chikkadpally, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr. M. Venkatesh, s/o Late Mr. M. Nago Rao, H.No.3- t7 / 2, Mamidiguda, Wanwat, Adilabad.

¶9

Mr. M. Charan, s/o Late Mr. M. Nago Rao, H.No.3- 17 /2, Mamidiguda, Wanwat, Adilabad.

¶10

Mr.M. Rohit, s/o Late Mr. M. Nago Rao, H.No.3-17 / 2, Mamidiguda, Wanwat, Adilabad.

¶11

Smt M. Lakshmi, w/o Late Mr. M. Nago H.No.3-L7/2, MamidiMamidi Wanwat, Adilabad.

¶12

H.No.3-L7/2, MamidiMamidi *
d5
Wanwat, Adilabad. Defendants
030[I
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Applicant A.M. Kiran Kumar
For the Defendants Exparte

¶13

(oA. No.191/202a)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.29,31,O74l_ (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakhs Thirty One Thousand and Seventy four only) with future interest @ 13.80o/o p.awith monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization.

¶16

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that one Late Mr. MesaramNago Rao availed personal loan for a sum of Rs.25.00 lakhs and executed roan documents on 30.09.2022 i.e., Arrangement letter, personal loan agreement and Irrevocable standing instruction to secure personar roan. Late M. Nago Rao is father of defendants 1 to 3 and husband of defendant no.4. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 04.05.2023 and issued recall notice dated 14.09.2023, 13.10.2023 and L2.l2.2O23.Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶17

Defendants No.1 to 4 called abseff and

0.07.2024.

03ocTu ;

(oA. No.1e1l2024)

Smt M. Sarala, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself AS AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.9.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶24

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶25

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.A1 to A.9. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished 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.

¶26

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.28,31,O74l- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakhs Thirty One four only) with future interest @ 13.80 from tion till the date of rea lization ; ;^o3ouTxpl ; '{a PSsr, iWMS

¶27

(OA.No.191/2024)

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶33

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 3'd day of Oct,2024)

sdl(G. coPtCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

et
3 0cI

ts coP1,,
ARy taKr^
L[.''
Asd
D',li"l, ffiii:,"

¶38

State Bank of India v. Mr . M Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr . M Venkatesh

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

State Bank of India versus Primary Agricultural Co. Operative Society

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kasi Reddy Venna

Dudemetla Srinivasulu versus State Bank of India

Bank of Maharashtra versus Gogineni Media Pvt. Ltd.

Ms Blue Park Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Veladi Bhadraiah versus State Bank of India