Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Mahesh Laxman Rikibe

DRT11 Aug 2025OA/167/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DT-I at Hyderabad allowed an OA filed by State Bank of India against Sri Mahesh Laxman Rikibe for recovery of outstanding personal loan amounts totaling Rs. 29,13,210 along with future interest and costs, as the defendant remained absent and the bank substantiated its claim through documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 29,13,210 plus future interest @ 14.55% p.a. from 20.04.2025, and issuance of recovery certificate.

State Bank of India versus Sri Mahesh Laxman Rikibe — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT^HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 11THDAY OF^{AUGUST, 2025}

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND,^{PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶4

oA.No.167 0F 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, (SARB-2), 1-8-563/1, 1't floor, Opp Sandhya Theatre, RTC X roads, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, TS Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Mahesh LaxmanRikibe, S/o R. laxman, aged 34^years, Occ: Govt service, r/o H.No.12-11-881, Boudhanagar, Warasiguda, Secunderabad - 500 061.

¶10

And also at H.no.4-242, Plot no.29B, MLR colony, Road No.3, Dammaiguda, Medchal-Malkajgiri - 500 083.

¶11

Defendant

¶12

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

mt B. RamanaKumari

For the Defendant

,^11tt,c ?ffi 1. The Applicant Bank'r filed the^present against Defendant for recovery of a tota I - (Rupees Twenty nine Lakhs Thirteen hundred and Ten only)

¶17

(oA. No.1571202s)

¶18

(Rs.1l,27,O3tl- + L7,86,t791-) with future interest @ 14.55o/o p.a with monthly rests from 20.04.2025 till the date of realization.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed Personal loan of Rs.10.00 lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated 24.04.2023 and agreed to repay of Rs.19,8128/per month commencing from May 2023. The defendant again availed personal loan of Rs.15.00 lakhs on 16.10.2023. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA and legal notice was issued on 8.04.2025. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶20

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 14.07.2025.

¶21

Smt M. Sarala, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.12.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

The point thq ideration iS whether the Applicant Bank iS the OA against the Defendant as

¶24

11 ru/' ?w

¶25

(oA.No.1671202s)

¶26

Defendant remained exparte. To substantiate the case of^the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank^{was examined} and she exhibited relevant documents as^Ex.A1 to^{A.12. In view of} the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has^established their^claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence^{the ApplicantBank} is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with^{future interest} and costs.

¶27

B. In the result, the^present OA is allowed with^{costs, as under:} The Defendant is liable to^pay to the Applicant^Bank a^{total sum of} Rs.29,L3,2tOl- (Rupees Twenty nine Lakhs^Thirteen Thousand Two hundred and Ten only)^{(Rs.11,27,O3L1'+} from

¶28

t7,86J791-) with future interest @^{14.55o/o p.a} 20.04.2025tt11 the date of realization ;

¶29

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to^{proceedagainstthe person} and^properties of defendant towards^{realization of the debtdue.}

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶33

te a copy of the order to the^parties concerned.

¶34

by her, corrected, signed and^{pronouncedby mein the opencourton}

¶35

sd/-

¶36

(G. GOPTCHAND)

¶37

rRuE 90* PRESIDING OFFICER "#i';?Yi'H'

State Bank of India v. Sri Mahesh Laxman Rikibe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Mahesh Laxman Rikibe

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

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Bazaru Arun Kumar

Uco Bank versus Sri Jerpala Ramjee - Mohan Multispeciality Hospital

Uco Bank versus Sri Jerpla Ramjee

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Balaji Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri Popthi Varun

Canara Bank versus Mrs. Lalitha Upadhyay