Allowed

State Bank of India v. Karleen Industries Private Limited

DRT16 Apr 2024OA/24/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by State Bank of India against five defendants (a company and its directors/guarantors) for recovery of loan dues totaling approximately Rs. 1.92 crores along with future interest and costs. The defendants were absent, and the Applicant's evidence was accepted.

What did the court decide?

Ordered Defendants to pay Rs. 1,92,59,670/- with future interest; joint and several liability imposed; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Karleen Industries… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL'2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶4

OA.No.24 OF 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch (SARB), second floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad.

¶7

Represented by its authorized signatory

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Karleen Industries Private Limited, Represented by its Directors, Flat no.303, Sy.No.123, Model towers, Bapujinagar, Bowenpally, Secunderabad - 500 011.

¶11

Mrs. Jasbir Singh Kaur, W/o Mr. Tarandeep Singh Khera, Aged about 35 years, occ: managing Director, R/o Plot no.1B, Sri Sai Enclave, DCHS, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad - 15.

¶12

Mr. Satnam Singh Khera, s/o Mr. Santhok Singh Khera, aged about 66 years, occ: director, R/o Plot no.1B, Sri Sai Enclave, DCHS, Tirumalgiri, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad - 1- 11

¶13

DCHS, Tirumalgiri, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad - 1- 11

¶14

1. Mr. Jasdeep Singh Khera, f^--g S/o Mr. Satnam Singh Khera, Aged about 36 years, occ: directo Ji^{1$rPn&{ *}

¶15

R/o Plot no.1B, Sri Sai Enclave, DCHS, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad **'*?t&9

¶16

(OA.No.24 of 2023 )

¶17

Mr. Ramandeep Singh Khera, s/o Mr. Satnam Singh Khera, aged about 32 years, occ: director, R/o Plot no.18, Sri Sai Enclave, DCHS, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad - 15. Defendants

¶18

Counsel for the Parties:

¶19

For the Applicant

¶20

For the Defendants

¶21

Sri Momin Mohammed Rafiq Exparte

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,92,59,67Ol- (Rupees One Crore Ninety Two Lakhs Fifty Nine thousand Six hundred and Seventy only) i.e.,

¶24

a) A sum of Rs.56,42,198/- under term loan account with future interest @13.25olo with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

b) A sum of Rs.1,0L,86,272/- under cash credit loan account with future interest @ 13.25o/o with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

c) A sum of Rs.31,24,042/- under GECL account with future interest @ 9.80o/o with mo date of application till the date ,r''

¶27

of realization , ,i: ','^:

¶28

(OA.No.24 of 2023)

¶29

d) A sum of Rs.2,84,963/- under FITL-1 account with future interest @12.90olo with monthry rests from date of apprication tiil the date of rea lization

¶30

e) A sum of Rs.22,195/- under FITL-2 account with future interest @12.90olo with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realizationand in default for sale of hypothecated property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶31

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a^private Limited Company represented by defendant no.2 as its director and Defendants no.2 to 5 are directors and guarantors of the Company. The defendant no.1 company availed cash credit limit of Rss.84.00 lakhs and term loan of Rs.g2.00 lakhs respectively on 14.08.2018. To secure due repayment of above amounts, the defendants executed sanction letter, letter of arrangement, agreement of loan cum hypothecation and deed of guarantee dated 14.08.2018. on further request of defendants the applicant bank sanctioned GECL loan of Rs.30.00 lakhs on 10.06.2020 and executed various necessary documents. Subsequently the defendants availed FITL limit of Rs.5,g9,000/- on 28.06.2021 and e same together with interest. After availing [he'toan dants failed to comply the terms of sanbtion, th:n-c€Ar?ft.iapp t bank was constrained to classify the account as issued legal notice dated

¶32

(oA.No.24 of 2023)

¶33

20.09.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the

¶34

defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶35

Defendants No.1 to 5 called absent and set exparte on 02.0g.2023.

¶36

Smt K. Geetha Lakshmi, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.20.

¶37

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

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 rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.20. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entiued to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶41

"%'\ B. In the result, the present is anowed ,^as under: 4

¶42

(oA.No.24 of 2023)

¶43

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1,92,59,6701- (Rupees One Crore Ninety Two Lakhs Fifty Nine thousand Six hundred and Seventy only) i.e.,

¶44

a) A sum of Rs.56,42,198/- under term loan account with future interest @13.25olo from date of application till the date of realization;

¶45

b) A sum of Rs.1,01,86,272/- under cash credit loan account with future interest @ 13.25% from date of application till the date of realization;

¶46

c) A sum of Rs.31,24,042l- under GECL account with future interest @ 9.800/o from date of application till the date of realization;

¶47

d) A sum of Rs.2,84,963/- under FITL-1 account with future interest @12.90o/o from date of application till the date of realization

¶48

e) A sum of Rs.22,195/- under FITL-2 account with future interest @12.90o/o from date of application till the date of realization.

¶49

The proceed against the hypothecated to OA towards realization of the

¶50

debt due.
A
&

¶51

(OA.No.24 of 2023)

¶52

The Applicant Bank ls also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 5 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶53

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

¶54

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

¶55

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶56

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶57

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16th day of Aptil'2024)

¶58

sdl_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶59

r : iii iiji{

¶60

trVtr:T<br>,ri:,:{;E3fri,.

State Bank of India v. Karleen Industries Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Karleen Industries Private Limited

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 M/S. Aditya Upvc Manufacturerss

Canara Bank versus M/S. Abhinandadna Industries

Indian Bank versus M/S. J.C.Infra

State Bank of India versus Pps Hospitality Services

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Srinivasa Packaging Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri. Motor Deepak Kumar