Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Jonnada Sravani

DRT25 Nov 2025OA/168/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Origin application by State Bank of India for recovery of a defaulted term loan and GECL facility secured by hypothecation of buses from a borrower who failed to repay. Bank proved claim via documentary evidence; borrower offered no defence. Court allowed application and granted recovery.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.59,18,061/- with interest and penalty; recovery certificate issued; proceedings against hypothecated vehicles and other properties authorized.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Jonnada Sravani — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I^{AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND,^{PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶4

OA.No.168 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, SARB-II, Chikkadpally, Opp Sandhya theatre, RTC X roads, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Smt lonnada Sravani, Wo^{Jonnada Sudershan Reddy,} Aged 35, occ: business, R/o plot no.6L,62, flat no.302, Tulip Castle Apartment, Near Pillar no.l79, UpparPally Village, Rajendranagar mandal, Hyderabad - 500 048.

¶10

Also at

¶11

L3-6-438/ A/36, l't floor, Satyanarayana nagar colony, rden, 028. \ * H.No.I-64/ 4t, Nakkalapalle^village, Kethireddypalle^{(post), Moinabad} Mandal, Ranga Reddy -^{501 504.}

¶12

Defendant

¶13

(oA.No.158/2024)

¶14

Counsel for the Parties:

¶15

For the Applicant Sri M. Venkat Divakar For the Defendant Sri M. Naveen Reserved on t9.Lt.2025 Pronounced on 24.rt.2025 Uploaded in website on 25.LL.2025

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against^{Defendantfor recovery} of a total sum of Rs.59,18,061/-^{(RupeesFifty Nine Lakhs} Eighteen Thousand and Sixty One only) i.e., a^{sum of} Rs.45,20,496l- with further interest @ 9.35olo^p.a with^{monthly rests} and a sum of Rs,13,97,565/-^with further^interest @^{7.40o/op.a with} monthly rests and^penal interest @^{2olo p'a from 03.05.2024 till the} date of realization and in default^{for hypothecatedvehicles as} mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the^{ApplicantBank} states that defendant availed^{term loan of Rs.69.00lakhsfor purchase} of three buses and agreed to^{repay the term loan in 60 monthly} _^{.r1ns[e].l,T"ntsof Rs.1,5L,292/- commencingfrom 25.06.2020.The} -oerenoAP{ the agreement of loan^{cum hypothecationdated} 4rz'.41 k 11ii2.201 guarantee agreement dated tL.l2.2ot9.^The ', ' S ridrdnps, availed GECL loan of^{Rs.20.00lakhs on 08.02.2022} arrangement dated 08.02.2022^{and extended the} 2

¶19

(oA.No.168/2024)

¶20

hypothecation of buses to the enhanced limits. It^{is submitted by the} Applicant bank that the Defendant has availed the^{said loan facilities} and failed to keep up the repayment^{schedule,as such the account} was classified as NPA on 30.t2.2023 and issued demand^{notice dated} 0L.0L.2024. Inspite of demands made by^Applicant the^defendant had not regularized the account, and the defendant did not^come forward to repay the same, The total claim of^{Applicantagainst} defendant is of Rs.59,l8,O6Ll-^(Rupees Fifty^{Nine Lakhs} Eighteen Thousand and Sixty One only) i.e., a sum^of Rs.45,20,496/- with further interest @ 9.35o/o^p.a with^{monthly rests} and a sum of Rs.13,97,565/- with further interest @^{7.40o/op'a with} monthly rests and^penal interest @ 20lo^p.a from 03,05.2024 till^the date of realization. Hence the OA.

¶21

The Defendant filed written statement^{and denied the averments made} in OA. The defendant admitted the availment of^{loan and} hypothecation of vehicles in respect of^{scheduleproperty in favour of} Applicant bank. It is further submitted^{by the defendantthat due to} covid-19 she suffered losses, hence^{committeddefault in repaying the} It is further contended that the^{Applicant bank seized} tioned in the schedule^{properties.Henceprayed for} dismissal of * 2s

¶22

(oA.No.168/2024)

¶23

3' The Applicant Bank in support of its claim, filed evidence affidavit duly sworn in by Sri B. Rama Krishna prasad, Manager of Bank as AW.1 and through him marked 13 documents as Ex.A.1 to A.13. As against this, the defendant did not choose to adduce any evidence on her behalf in support of her contentions and also did not choose to cross examine the AW.1 to controvert his Chief Evidence. In spite of repeated adjournments, the defendant failed to file evidence Affidavit, hence the right of filing Defendant Evidence Affidavit was closed on 19.11.2025.

¶24

I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶25

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶26

i) Whether the Applicant Bank has proved its claim as made in OA against the defendant ?

¶27

ii) To what relief ?

¶28

Point No.i):

¶29

As per the documents filed by the Applicant Bank and also as per the admissions made by the defendant in the Written statement, it is very that has availed loan from the Applicant Bank, but

¶30

ii,^{failed to} 3 amount. All the amounts paid by the defendant are

¶31

n' Tclgally,meqtioneld,in^{the statement of accountfited by Applicant Bank.}

¶32

l:' ,.-, ii ''r: The defendant.]f16s not placed any material documents to show her . r^{.r''' .-'}

¶33

\i^ ,

¶34

(oA.No.158/202a)

¶35

bonafldes for estabrishing that the hypothecated vehicres are seized by the Applicant bank.

¶36

AW.1 is not cross examined by the counsel for defendant. The defendant has not come forward to give evidence to substantiate that her liability is less than the amount mentioned in the oA Under such circumstances, the evidence of AW.1 coupled with recitals Ex.A.1 to A.13 stood unchallenged and unrebutted. The Applicant bank clearly established that the defendant is liable to pay the oA amount to the Applicant bank.

¶37

Point No.ii)

¶38

In the result, the present originar apprication is ailowed with costs as under:

¶39

The Defendant is liable to pay to Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.59,18,O51l- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lakhs Eighteen Thousand and Sixty One only) i.e., a sum of Rs.45,20,496l_ with further interest @ 9.35o/o p.a and a sum of Rs.13,97,565/_ with further interest @ 7.40o/o p.a from 03.os.zoz4 tiil the date of rearization ;

¶40

entitled to proceed against the hypothecated in the schedule to OA towards realization of

¶41

(oA.No.168/2024)

¶42

9' The Appricant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶43

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

¶44

The Appricant shail fire a cost memo within two weeks From the date of receipt of order.

¶45

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶46

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶47

(Dictated to the p,A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 24th day of Nov,2025)

¶48

sd/-

¶49

*!t
5 ltnrt ',nr

¶50

/ (G. GoptcHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
nRr-1, ilYoEnnglo'

State Bank of India v. Smt. Jonnada Sravani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Jonnada Sravani

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

Kamma Upender versus State Bank of India

Alakuntla Yellaiah versus Smfg India Home Finance Company Limited

G Sreedharan versus Bank of Baroda

Central Bank of India versus Sri. Mohd. Khaleel

Canara Bank versus Sri. Sura Sree Harsha

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Nathani Shiva Naga Jyothi