Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Balaji Trading Company

DRT5 Aug 2024OA/60/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debtors Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against seven defendants (principal borrower, guarantors, mortgagors, and legal heirs) for recovery of Rs. 1,79,45,000, interest, and costs, holding the bank established its claim.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 1,79,45,000 with future interest at 13.50% p.a. from OA filing date; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated and mortgaged properties; recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Balaji Trading Company — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE sTH DAY OF AUGUST' 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESTDING oFFICER

OA.No.6O ot 2024

Between:

State Bank of India,

Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095.

¶7

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s. Balaji Trading Company, A partnership firm represented by Its Partner, plot no.165/p, Aparna Palm Groove, Kompalli, Medchal Malkajgiri district, Hyderabad.

¶11

Sri AllamMarreddy, s/o A. logi Reddy, aged major, male, H.No.1-B-47, plot no.52, Ganesh nagar, Quthbullapur, Ranga Reddy District, TS.

¶12

Sri Pesaru Rajesh, s/o Sri P. Papi Reddy, aged 45 years, male,

¶13

H. No. 1 1-22-57, Kasibugga, Warangal, Telangana State.

¶14

Sri DargaShankeraiah, Aged major, male, H.No.2-11 Himayathnagar, Rajendranagar, K.V. Ranga Reddy District, Telangana - 600 086.

lI 5 [U$ m?t

Also at

(OA.No.60 of 2024)

MCH No.9-1-34/ Lsl23/ A, Bapunagar, Langer house, Hyderabad - 500 008.

¶19

q Sri DargaRambabu, s/o Shankeraiah, aged 39 years, male, H.No.2-109, Himayathsagar village, Near Police Academy, Rajendranagarmandal, KV Ranga Reddy District, TS - 500 086.

¶20

Sri DargaShivdas, s/o Shankeriah, aged 44 years, male, 3-43, Himayathsagar village, Rajendranagarmandal, K.V. Ranga Reddy district, Telangana - 500 086.

¶21

SmtKuntiChittamma, w/o Late Narasimha, female, H.No.2-11, Himayathnagar, Rajendranagar, K.V. Ranga Reddy dist, T5-86.

¶22

Defendants

¶23

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant

¶24

For the Defendants

¶25

Sri C. Prabhakar Expa rte

¶26

ORDER

¶27

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1t79,24,745l- (Rupees One Crore Seventy Nine Lakhs Twenty Four thousand Seven hundred and 13. 1 5olo Forty Five only) with p.a with monthly rests from date of of 6ffi,,rr realization /ry-.. and in default for sale of mortgaged properties as described in

¶28

(OA.No.60 of 2024)

¶29

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 is principar borrower. Defendants 2,3 and one Smt D. Chennamma stood as guarantors. Defendant no.3 and one smt D. chennamma were mortgagors. Defendants 1 to 3 avaired cash credit of Rs.190.00 lakhs vide retter of arrangement dated 76.17.2021. After availing of loan and creation of mortgage, Smt D. chennamma died intestate reaving behind defendants No.4 to 7 as her legal heirs and successors hence defendants no.4 to 7 were arrayed as defendants. Defendants 2 & 3 representing defendant no'1 firm jointry executed agreement of roan cum hypothecation dated 16.11.202t and hypothecated ail movabre assets more fuily described under oA schedule property-I. Defendant no.3 created equitable mortgage on t6.I1.2021 by way of deposit of sale deed no.5417/2006 dated 31.05.2006 in respect of schedule property_Il. To secure due repayment of aforesaid loan, Smt D. Chennamma created mortgage on 16.11.2021 by way of deposit of sare deed No.32Bl2009 dated 12.2.1999 in respect of OA schedule property_Ill. After availing the roan facirity, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as Np ed legal notice dated 03.0t.2024. and demands, the ,# is OA. defendants did not clear thdjbutstanH g. Hencex $ 5^ALlc7n2t

¶30

(OA.No.60 of 2024)

¶31

Counsel for Defendants No.1 to 7 called absent and set exparte on tt.07.2024.

¶32

Sri Dhanunjaya Panda, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.17.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶34

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?

¶35

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.17. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶36

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

¶37

The Defendants rally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a tiitu r crore seventy NineC r-LA'llt '1,ir"rtv Four thousand Seven

¶38

(OA.No.60 of 2024)

¶39

hundred and Forty Five only) with further interest @ 13.15olo p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶40

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables and mortgaged properties as described in schedules "I to IU" to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 7 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶46

(Dictated by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court Au?, 2024)

¶47

d"
sd/-
*
(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
., nsllJ8 t ?
, ^"J
dw
.r.. -{
^ro.gl
5
' ;99

State Bank of India v. M/S. Balaji Trading Company

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Balaji Trading Company

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

Uco Bank versus Sri Macharla Naresh

State Bank of India versus Smt. Kirthi Goel

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Yrk Industries

Indian Bank versus Sanghi Manoj Kumar

State Bank of India versus Sri. Narsimhulu Muggu

State Bank of India versus Smt. Usha Sree