Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Degala Prabhudas

DRT8 Oct 2024OA/236/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debt Recovery Tribunal order, the Bank established its claim for recovery against the Defendant via documentary evidence examined in the absence of the Defendant. The Tribunal allowed the application, ordering recovery of the principal amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 46,52,016/- with interest at 14.05% p.a. from the date of application until realization.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Degala Prabhudas — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE OSTHDAY OF OCTOBER' 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.236 ol2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC bus Terminal Complex, (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti, Hyderabad, Telangana State. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Mr. Degala Prabhudas, 4-58, Astnagurthy, Wyra, Khammam district, Telangana State - 507 304.

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

For the Applicant

¶13

Sri C. Sreedhar

¶14

For the Defendant Ex pa rte

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.46,52,016/- (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Fifty Two thousand and Sixteen only) further

¶17

interest @ 14.05o/o p.a with monthly rests frc

¶18

till the date of realization and in sale t property as described in the schedule to 0 B 0[T^,n,l

-.o-.5

{N.w

(oA.No.235 of 2024)

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed term loan of Rs.38,50,000/- vide arrangement letter dated 02.12.2022 for purchasing the Bus Registration Number TS04UE20B2. To secure due repayment of the loan amount, the defendant executed Agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 02.t2.2022 and hypothecated the Bus, vehicle Regn

¶23

No.TS04UE2082 dated 25.0t.2t023 with the Applicant bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constralned to classify the account as NPA and issued legal notice dated 22.05.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶24

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 18.09.2024.

¶25

Sri Manjul Dixit, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex,A.1 to A.9.

¶26

5, Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶27

The point that arise for consideration is whethei Applicant Bank iS \ nda nt as

¶28

prayed for?

¶29

(OA.No.235 of 2024)

¶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.9. 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 entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶31

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.46,52,O16l- (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Fifty Two thousand and Sixteen only) with further interest @ 14.05% p.a from date of application Ull the date of realization.

¶32

The Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated

¶33

property as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person

¶35

and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶36

The Applicant Bank

¶37

of the OA.
12. The Applicant shall fi
weeks from the date
of receipt of order. 0 0 0[I ,rril ?
r.l
e;-slt?

¶38

{OA.No.236^{of 2024)}

¶39

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶40

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶41

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the Sthday of OcI,2024)

¶42

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶43

*
. 00ltTnw :

¶44

State Bank of India v. Mr. Degala Prabhudas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Degala Prabhudas

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

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Adepu Anuradha

Canara Bank versus Mr. M. Shiva Prasad

Catherine Paul Boyapalli versus Varthana Finance Pvt. Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Datla Srinivas Raju

State Bank of India versus Maruthi Super Stores

Sri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal versus Icici Bank Limited