Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. S.R Agencies and Fmcg

DRT5 Jan 2024OA/226/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by the State Bank of India against a proprietary concern and its proprietor for recovery of a dues of approx Rs. 49.23 lakhs with interest.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 49,23,882/ with interest; sale of hypothecated movables to realize the debt.

What the court decided

State Bank of India versus M/S. S.R Agencies and Fmcg — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrs THE 5rH DAy oF JANUARY,2oz4

¶2

PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.226 ot 20.23

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, ARMB ChikkadpaIy, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s..S.R. Agencies & FMCG, l".q^{O, its proprietorMrs. daddam} sarnyavya, female, aged major, !-7,25/3/7/1,^{KottaAriroor,''} PerkitArmoor, Armoor, Nizamabad district _ 503 224.

¶9

Mrs. GaddamSathyavva, t-emale, aged maior r - L.2s / 3 / i r, xotlJi.roo., perkitArmoor, Armoor, Nizamabad district _ 503 224.

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the parties: For the Applicant For the Defendantsthe DefendantsDefendants

¶12

Sri A.M. Kiran Kumar
For the Defendantsthe DefendantsDefendants
Exparte
1. The Applicant Ba
against Defendants for
recovery of a to
Rs,;49!3
l,:"rPr. - (Rupees Forty Nine
Lakhs Twenty
Hundred and Eighty
K..:ll.^*l'T

¶13

(oA.No.226 of 2023)

¶14

Twoonly) with interest @ L2.4Oo/o p.awith monthly rests from 11.05.2023 till the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA,

¶15

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 as proprietor avaired cash credit facirity of Rs.42.70 lakhs. The said facility was secured by hypothecation of assets and book debts as mentioned in the schedure to oA. The defendants executed Demand promissory note for Rs.42.70 rakhs, Dp Note Deliver letter, retter of arrangement and agreement of roan cum hypothecation. 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 on 28.09.2e22 and issuecl legal notice dated 31.03.2023. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶16

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 16.11.2023.

¶17

Shri D. Naga Prasad, Manager plicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhi ents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.6. * T '>-'/t '//

¶18

(OA.No.226 of 2023)

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

prayed for?

¶23

Defendants cailed 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 4,6. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entiiled to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶24

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

¶25

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.49,23,gglt_ (Rupees Forty Nine Lakhs Twenty Three thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Two only) with interest @ t2.4Oo/o p.afrom11.05.2023 till realization.

¶26

The Applicant bank is against the hypothecated

¶27

mova bles as descri towards rea lization of

¶28

the debt due.

¶29

(OA.No.226 of 2023)

¶30

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

¶31

L2, The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶32

The Appricant shaI fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶33

t4. Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶35

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed b-y her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the sth day of Jan'2024)

¶36

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND)

¶37

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

err'.t<br>D
// .i
:
*-
702f ..i:
$.-

¶39

4,'eV:.y\r
-ry\Vl
oil1,"7a;gd;oc'D'

State Bank of India v. M/S. S.R Agencies and Fmcg

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

State Bank of India v. M/S. S.R Agencies and Fmcg

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

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

Canara Bank versus Mr. M. Vivek

Union Bank of India versus M/S Vishwarajaa Industries

State Bank of India versus Smt. Gadmoor Rani