Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. Manda Srinivas

DRT4 Dec 2024OA/195/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against a defaulting borrower. The bank established its claim to recovery of a personal loan of approximately Rs. 24.22 Lakhs along with future interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Allowed OA with costs. Defendant to pay Rs.24,22,601/- with interest @ 12.90% p.a. Recovery certificate to be issued.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Manda Srinivas — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS^{THE4THDAYOF DECEMBER'2024}

¶3

PRESENT: SRI^{GUMMADI GOPICHAND,PRESIDING OFFICER} OA'No'195 ot²⁰²⁴

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank^{of India,} Stressed Assets^{RecoveryBranch-II,} 1-B-563/1,^{1't floor, oPP SandhYa,} Theatre, RTC^{Cross Roads,Chikkadpally,} Hyderabad,^{Telangana State.} Represented^{bY its ChiefManager}

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri Manda^Srinivas, h.No.5-57,^{MallakaPallYvillage,} Enumamula,^Warangal -^{506 003'} Telangana State.

¶9

Defendant

¶10

Counsel^{for the Parties:}

¶11

For the APPlicant

¶12

For the Defendant

¶13

Sri C. Prabhakar Exparte

¶14

ORDER

¶15

against^{Defendant for} 1. The Applicant^{Bank filed the presentOA} recovery of of^{a total sum of Rs'total sum of Rs'sum of Rs'of Rs'Rs'} (RuPees Twenty^Four

¶16

recovery of of^{a total sum of Rs'total sum of Rs'sum of Rs'of Rs'Rs'} (RuPees Twenty^Four and One onlY)^with Lakhs TwentY^Two from date^{of filing} further interest @¹ ;;&'.^JJ * of OA till^{the date orEariz{iqnSEE ,$il} ; A, c#ttiij

¶17

(OA.195 of 2024)

¶18

As per the averments in the^{application, the ApplicantBankstates} that defendant availed^{personal loan ofRs.25.00lakhsvide} Arrangement letter dated 09.02.2023,^{and agreed accepted the} terms and conditions of the sanction.^{The defendantexecuted} personal loan agreement dated 09'02.2023. After^{availing the loan} facility, the defendant failed to^{comply the terms of sanction, hence} the applicant bank was constrained^{to classify the account as NPA} and issued legal notice dated^{t5.04.2024.Inspite of several} requests and demands, the^{defendantdid not clear the outstanding'} Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendant called absent and^{set exparte on lt.lt.2024'}

¶20

Sri J. Rama Rao, Chief^{Manager of the Applicant Bank examined} himself as AW.1 and exhibited^{relevant documents,which are} marked as Ex.A.1 to A.6.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel for^{the ApplicantBank.}

¶22

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

¶23

Even though his counsel failed to file written statement. To substantiate^the of the Applicant Bank, 1 n^l0EC2Ui AW.1, official of ined and he exhibited it -^as Qia:;t-V

¶24

(oA.19s of 2024)

¶25

relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.6. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶26

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.24,22,6OL/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Six hundred and One only) with further interest @ 12.90o/o p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶31

Communicate a copy of thel order to the parties concerned.

¶32

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

¶33

¶34

Jr' sd/-
IP B
(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
ARUF c%
ll e:\i{.u

¶35

oR7-t'

State Bank of India v. Sri. Manda Srinivas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. Manda Srinivas

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

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sanjeevani Industries

State Bank of India versus Mr. Md. Mohammad

Ms Maruthi Tubes Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Sri Ganta Chandra Mohan

State Bank of India versus M/S. Vajra Parboiled Rice Mills Private Limited

Canara Bank versus M/S. Nandita Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.