Allowed

State Bank of India v. Maruthi Super Stores

DRT9 Oct 2024OA/55/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed an object application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of a debt of Rs.23.30 lakhs and future interest against a partnership firm and its three partners. Calling the defendants absent, the Tribunal held the bank had established its claim through documentary evidence marked. The joint and several liability of the defendants, entitlement to proceed against hypothecated pr

What did the court decide?

Directing Defendants to pay Rs.23,30,888/- with future interest; authorizing proceedings against hypothecated property and personal assets of partners; issuing recovery certificate.

State Bank of India versus Maruthi Super Stores — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrs rHE 9rH DAy oF ocroBER,zo24

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.SS of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch - II, 7-8-563/1, 1't floor, Opp Sandhya Theatre, RTC Cross roads, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, Telangana State

¶7

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Maruthi Super Stores, Represented by its Partners, Sri JastiHanumantha Rao, SmUastiRohini and V. Malleswari, Plot no.5, raghavendranagar, Ragannaguda, Turkayamjal, Ranga Reddy - 501 510.

¶11

And also at

¶12

Plot no.3, Survey No.173, Vanasthalipuram, Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Hyderabad - 500 070.

¶13

Sri lastiHanumantha Rao, s/o Ven katAppa ia hJasti, aged 48 years, occ: business, Plot no.5, Raghavendranagar, Ragannaguda, Turkayamja l, Ranga Reddy - 501 510.

¶14

And also at

¶15

$"-.s"<br>E 0eosr&t i
W*#

¶16

(OA.No.ss/2024)

¶17

Plot no.3, Survey No.173, Vanasthalipuram, Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Hyderabad - 500 070.

¶18

SmtJastiRohini, w/o Sri JastiHanumantharao, aged 43 years, occ: business, Plot no.5, Raghavendranagar, Ragannaguda, Turkayamjal, Ranga Reddy - 501 510.

¶19

And also at

¶20

Plot no.3, Survey No.173, Vanasthalipuram, Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Hyderabad - 500 070.

¶21

Sri V. Malleswari, w/o Lakshmaiah Naidu Sarangu, aged 64, occ: business, Plot no.5, Raghavend ranagar, Ragannaguda, Turkayamjal, Ranga Reddy - 501 510.

¶22

And also at

¶23

Plot no.3, Survey No.173, Vanasthalipuram, Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Hyderabad - 500 070.

¶24

Defendants

¶25

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Smt B. Ramana Kumari

Exparte

(oA.No.ss/202a)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.23r3Or8B8/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Eight only) i.e.,

¶33

a) A sum of Rs.21,46,035/- in respect of cash credit loan account with current and future interest @ 74.40o/o p.a with monthly rests from 18.01.2024 till the date of realization;

¶34

b) A sum of Rs.1,B4,B53l- in respect of WCTL account with current and future interest @ tL.25o/o p.a with monthly rests from 18.01.2024 till the date of realization;

¶35

and in default for sale of hypothecated property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶36

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a partnership firm and defendants 2 to 4 are its partners availed cash credit of Rs.19.00 lakhs and term loan of Rs.1.00 lakh on 03.11.2018. The defendant no.1 executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation in favour of the Applicant bank. Subsequently the cash credit facility was renewed of Rs.1.90

¶37

lakhs on 05.05.202"ffi I the cash credit of Rs.19.00 lakhs and avaitd't*gtCths aggregating to a sum of Rs.22.83 lakh ailing the loan facilities, the iy i -1 'tof^Gff'rrfo"H . ll \L ;^,IJ#

¶38

¶39

(oA.No.ss/202a)

¶40

defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 10.r2.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶41

3' Defendants No.1to 4 cailed absent and set exparte on 09.09.2024.

¶42

Sri O. Murali Sharma, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A. 13.

¶43

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶44

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

¶45

Defendants 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.13. In
view of the above, I hold that Bank has established
their claim made in the dants and hence the
Applicant Bank is entitl recor,@the cla ade in the OA with

i
future interest ana cosd.k $ g mI m
o
) -Y/
4^,i: ,I . J //
,"e,
Qth,'ry*$
sr'#,3

¶46

(oA.No.ssl2024)

¶47

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.23,30,g8g/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Eight only) i.e.,

¶48

a) A sum of Rs'21,46,035/- in respect of cash credit roan account with current and future interest @ !4,40o/o p.a from 18.0L.2024 till the date of realization;

¶49

b) A sum of Rs.1,84,853/- in respect of WCTL account with current and future interest @ 11.25% p.a from 18.01.2024 tiil the date of realization;

¶50

The Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecatedproperty as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶51

The Applicant Bank is also entiUed to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 4 and properties of Defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶52

The order of attachment in dated 09.10.2024 in respect of Petition schedu lute. Include the said property in the Recovery CertificE-te. ,."'ttomil^* ' i.,... ?

¶53

i.'cA - ^^!j W,***#

¶54

(OA.No.ss/2024)

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶59

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 9th day of Oct,2024)

¶60

sdl(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶61

h\
tlt

¶62

o"Unffi
,#fi9;"'m'^'

State Bank of India v. Maruthi Super Stores

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Maruthi Super Stores

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

State Bank of India versus Mr. Degala Prabhudas

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Adepu Anuradha

Canara Bank versus Mr. M. Shiva Prasad

State Bank of India versus Mr. Datla Srinivas Raju

Sri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal versus Icici Bank Limited

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Technologies Pvt. Ltd.