Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Annepalli Linga Reddy

DRT3 Jan 2024OA/210/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal adjudicated an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 66,63,954 along with interest. With the Defendant absent, the Tribunal examined bank officials and documents, found the claim substantiated, and allowed the application ordering payment and permitting action against hypothecated movable property.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 66,13,954 with interest; Applicant Bank entitled to realize debt from hypothecated movable property and Defendant's assets.

State Bank of India versus Sri Annepalli Linga Reddy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrs rHE 3RD DAy oF JANUARy, zoz4

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESTDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.21O of 2023

¶5

Between :

¶6

State Bank of India, ARMB, Chikkadpally, Opp Sandhya Theatre, RTC "X" roads, Hyderabad. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Annepalli Linga Reddy, S/o A. Anji Reddy, male, Aged 40 years, occ: business, R/o Plot no.181, Road no.5, HUDA Sai Nagar, Vanasthalipuram, Ranga Reddy District - 5OO O7O,

¶10

Also at :

¶11

H.No.5-16, Aregudem, Choutuppal mandal, Nalgonda District - 508 2S2,

¶12

Defendant

¶13

Counsel for the

¶14

For the Applicant M. Venkat Divakar For the rte

¶15

(oA. No.210/2023)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.66,13,954/_ (Rupees Sixty Six Lakhs Thirteen thousand Nine hundred and Fifty Four onty) i.€.,

¶18

a) A sum of Rs.50,53,748/_ under loan account No.38998304977 with further interest @ 13olo p.a ;

¶19

b) A sum of Rs.5,44,446/- under loan account no.39591125 267 with further interest @ 9.25olo p.a ;

¶20

c) A sum of Rs.10,15,760/- und€]. loan account No.40230891416 with further interest @ 9.25olo p.a ;

¶21

with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2o/o p.a from 09.06.2023 ti' the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated movable property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶22

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant availed term loan of Rs.46,00 lakhs on 12.L2.20I9, GECL loan of Rs.9,40,000/_ vide arrangement letter dated 21,08.2020 and another GECL of Rs.9,40,000/_. The defendant agreed to th*e{.-qprand conditions and entered into an agreement of I n dated t2.L2.2079.

¶23

availing the I failed to comply the terms ., ,. 2 .,.-, i .U..'..f -s./ .::,,, - ;rDSf^l'.i-i.// '' : ir. +-.- .^- l'. ",/.t'

¶24

(oA.No.210/2023)

¶25

of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 08.10.2022 and issued demand notice dated 25.LL.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA,

¶26

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 08.09.2023.

¶27

Sri M. Sarala, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.10.

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶29

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant as prayed for?

¶30

Defendant 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.10. 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 clalm made in the OA with future interest and,"ffi\

¶31

iig^{0 3 ,rru rEr} W*.#i

¶32

(OA.No.210/2023)

¶33

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

¶34

The Defendant is riable to pay to the Appricant Bank a totar sum of Rs.66,13,954/- (Rupees Sixty Six Lakhs Thirteen thousand Nine hundred and Fifty Four only) i.e.,

¶35

a)A sum of Rs.50,53,748l- under loan account No.3g99g304977 wilh further interest @ 13olo p.a ;

¶36

b)A sum of Rs.S,44,446/- under loan account no.39591125267 with further interest @ 9.25olo p.a ;

¶37

c) sum of Rs.10,15,760l- under loan account No.40230g91416 with further interest @ 9.25olo p.a from 09.06.2023 till the date of realization;

¶38

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movable property as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

within two weeks from the

¶42

date of

¶43

-k
*
rr 03rltnil
#".
(+$"

¶44

(oA.No.210/2023)

¶45

t4. 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 the open court on this the 3d day of Jan,2OZ4)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

ffts%<br>j:i

I-euE coPy

,4;:,if;Ei;[il,,

State Bank of India v. Sri Annepalli Linga Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Annepalli Linga Reddy

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

Similar cases

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Sri Deepthi Prints

Indian Bank versus M/S Aarthi Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Unituss Life Sciences

The South Indian Bank Limited versus Smt Chilakapudi Shanta Kumari

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S. Konark Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus Mr.Bollimpalli Pardhasaradhi