Allowed

State Bank of India v. Shri Medi Lingaiah

DRT5 Jan 2024OA/245/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant bank filed an OA for recovery of a sum of Rs.96,71,426/- with interest arising from a home loan default. The defendant was absent. The Tribunal held the bank established its claim and allowed the OA with a reduced principal amount.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs.36,71,426/- with interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property; recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Shri Medi Lingaiah — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrs rHE srH DAy oF JANUARY, 2oz4

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.245 ot 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Prakasham Bazaar bra nch, 5-7-1, New Prakasham Bazar, Shopping complex, Nalgonda, Telangana - 508 001.

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Shri MediLingaiah, s/o Narsimha alias Medilingaiah Narsimha, plot no.354, Chandragiri Vilas, Charlapally village, Bypass Junction, Hyderabad road, Nalgonda - 508 001. TS

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

For the Applicant Shri N. Meher P
For the Defendant
Ex pa rte
ORDER
-rit
r': . ' -";J
1. The Applicant Bank filed the present OA qsrg,
recovery of a total sum of Rs.96,7L,426/- ( Six

¶13

Lakhs Seventy One thousand Four hundred and Twenty

¶14

(oA.No.24sl2023)

¶15

sixonly) with interest @ 10.75% p.awith monthly rests from 24.06.2023 till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶16

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed home loan of Rs.18.00 lakhs for the purpose of construction of house inclusive of insurance cover. The defendant deposited tifle deeds of schedule property with Applicant bank on 30.08.2010 as security by way of mortgage of deposit of title deeds. The defendant executed Sale deed dated 14.07.2010 which was registered as document no.6926 of 2010 of SRO, Nalgonda. After availing the loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 01.8.2013 and issued Possession notice dated 24.10.2013. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶17

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 16.11.2023.

¶18

Smt M. Maithili, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant marked as Ex.A.1 to A.36.

¶19

, i r.,

¶20

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Ba

¶21

(oA. No.24sl2023)

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

Defendant called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of

¶25

the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.36. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established

¶26

their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the

¶27

Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with

¶28

future interest and costs.

¶29

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

¶30

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.36,71,4261- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Seventy One thousand Four hundred and Twenty six only) with interest @ 10.75o/o p.a from 24.06.2023 till the date of realization;

¶31

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged immovable property as described in the schedule to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶32

the Applicant Bank is also entit inst the person

¶33

and properties of defendant ebt due.

¶34

(oA.No.24sl2023)

¶35

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

¶36

The Applicant sharr fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶37

t4. Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

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

¶40

sdl-

¶41

(G. coPtcHAND)

¶42

PRES]DING OFFTCER

¶43

"''f+<br>(';"
ii i'^"'r, ^-.a:.i
\r.rr. ;., r,t- .,i.-.-iU)/
Qg;liB

State Bank of India v. Shri Medi Lingaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Shri Medi Lingaiah

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