Allowed

State Bank of India v. Akshara Industries

DRT21 Feb 2025OA/170/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the OA filed by State Bank of India against Akshara Industries and its proprietor. The Appellant Bank, via its manager as witness, proved the loan facility, documents, and NPA classification. The Tribunal held the bank established its claim for recovery of Rs. 64.24 lakhs with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

To pay sum of Rs. 64,24,884/- with interest and costs; proceeds against hypothecated movables and properties for realization of debt.

State Bank of India versus Akshara Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 2lsr DAy OF FEBRUARY, 2c.25

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

OA.No.17O of 2024

Between:

State Bank of India,

Stressed Assets Recovery Branch (SARB), 2nd floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus Terminal Complex, Koti, Hyderabad, Rep by its Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Akshara Industries,

¶11

Represented by its proprietor Sri NagarajuBuse, Major, Male, shed at^plot no.56/part, Block no.7, Ayodhyanagar, Subhashnagar, IDA JeedimeUa, Hyderabad - 500 055.

¶12

Also at:

¶13

Regd office at H.No.7-607, plot n.2, Subhashnagar, IDA jeedimeUa, Hyderabad - 500 055.

¶14

Sri NagarajuBuse, s/o Sri BuseNageswara Rao, major, male, proprietor of Akshara Industries, H.No.7-607, plot n.2, Subhashnagar, IDA jeedimetla, Hyderabad - 500 055.

¶15

uh,$
2 1 FFB 7n2(

¶16

Defendants

¶17

Counsel for the Parties:

¶18

For the Applicant

¶19

For the Defendants

¶20

Sri P.V. Satyanarayana

Exparte

(oA. No.170/2024)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.64,24,gg4l_ (Rupees Sixty four Lakhs Twenty four thousand Eight hundred and Eighty Four only) with interest @ 15.400/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶25

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant no.1 is a proprietary concern represented by its Proprietor the defendant no.2 avaired working capitar roan under term loan of Rs.60.00 rakhs vide retter of arrangement dated 08.03.2023' To secure due repayment of overail roan facirities, the defendants executed Agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 08.03.2023. The defendants hypothecated all the Stocks, Machinery, fixed assets, and other current assets etc more fuily described in the schedure to oA. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on 5.02.2024 and issued legal notice dated 02.02.2024. Inspite of several requests and demanlf ts did not clear the

¶26

outstanding. Hence this "{Uf;

¶27

(OA. No.170/2024)

¶28

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 05.09,2024.

¶29

Sri S. PrathikYadav, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are

¶30

marked as Ex.A.1 to A.6.

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶32

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶33

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶34

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibrted rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to 4.6. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶35

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

¶36

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the

¶37

Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.64,24,884/- (Rupees Sixty four ffi

¶38

uxns twe2ffStBq$S Eisht hundred and Eishty Four ,^ty) *{rf.;B r;"*N.;"; ; "; ;;.#,, ;; date oF.[u,iru,,E, .,,irq

¶39

(oA.No.170/2024)

¶40

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated

¶41

movables as described in schedule to OA towards rea lization of the

¶42

debt due.

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

The Appricant shaI fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶46

13, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶48

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 21st day of Feb,2O2S)

¶49

sd/(G. coPtCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶50

,t'--E
; t' ':1 ?rrzr i
\trt.ry-tV

State Bank of India v. Akshara Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Akshara Industries

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

Similar cases

M S Dreams Bakery Foods versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mohammad Mustafa

Bank of India versus M/s. Raj Plastic

kankanala Swarupa and others versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

shaik awaiz versus the Gayatri Co. Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Sunil Kumar Agarwal