Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Aja Solar a Proprietary Concern

DRT11 Jul 2024OA/69/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an objection application filed by State Bank of India against borrowers of a solar power firm for recovery of a loan amount totaling Rs. 43,97,603 with interest and costs, upholding the bank's claim upon reviewing documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 43,97,603 with interest at 14.40% p.a.; proceedings against hypothecated assets, person and properties of defendants authorized; recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Aja Solar a Proprietary Concern — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1lTH DAY OF JULY'2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.69 ol 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch (SARB) 2nd floor, TSRTC, bus stand Complex, Koti, Hyderabad. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Aja solar a proprietary concern, Represented by its proprietor Defendant no.2 Mrs. G. Meenakshi, 6-2-938/939, flat no.401, purni Plaza building, Khairatabad, Hyderabad - 500 082.

¶10

2, Mrs. Gone Meenakshi, w/o Gone SurendraBabu, aged about 38 years, occ: business, Proprietor of defendant no.1 2-2- 185 /34/ A, Ramakrishna nagar, Beside ThrimurthiBhavan, Amberpet, Hyderabad.

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Parties:

¶13

For the Applicant

¶14

For the Defendants

¶15

,,;f='ou "N
; llJrrLzt[t;

¶16

{oA.No.69/2024)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.43,g7,603/- (Rupees Forty three Lakhs Eighty Seven thousand Six hundred and three only) with interest @ 14.4o/o p.a with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated assets as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern carrylng on business of installation of solar power in various commercial and residential places. Defendant no.2 is the proprietor of defendant no.1 firm who availed working capital loan under India stand up cash credit facility of Rs,40.00 lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated 25.03.2022. To secure due repayment of said loan facility, the defendants executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation and hypothecated all the stocks, current assets, equipment, book debts, receivables etc more fully described in the schedure to oA. After avairing the roan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and issued legal n 2.2024. Inspite of several requests and deman'N qd 't ot clear the outstanding. Hence this OA. * 11$t?Sl ;1 r-1 ? 68,,lW V'n",',,,.*W !ovi.1,'--;7

¶20

(oA.No.69/2024)

¶21

Defendants No.1 and 2 called absent and set exparte on 05.06.2024.

¶22

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

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

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?

¶25

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.Al to A.9. 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 entifled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶26

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

¶27

The Defendants are j )le to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of .43$7; - (Rupees Forty t ti,oll["lB{ si, ndred and three

¶28

(oA.No.69/2024)

¶29

only) with interest @ 14.4o/o^p.afrom date of application till the date of realization.

¶30

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated assets as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶35

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶36

( Dictated to the P by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open
court on , 2024)
:!:t sdl-
-* (G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
JUL MI ?
&,
.:
OP/
| ". '.--t' Nfrry*Isst Ra-q/sfrar(T:v<br>DRT.I, H}ulER.^DAD.

State Bank of India v. M/S. Aja Solar a Proprietary Concern

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Aja Solar a Proprietary Concern

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sri.Pati Siva Narayana Murthy

Indian Bank versus Mr. S . Ajay Kumar

State Bank of India versus Ark Logistics

Bank of India versus M/S.Hanuman Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus Malineni Sayamma Poultry Firm

State Bank of India versus Sri Pailla Vikram Reddy