Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Nandamuri Transporters Private Limited

DRT20 Jun 2025OA/171/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows an original application filed by State Bank of India against transport business owners and guarantors. The Tribunal ruled that the bank, supported by witness examination, proved its claim for loan default and is entitled to recover dues plus interest.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed with costs; Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 6.25 crores with interest; Recovery certificate issued; Bank entitled to enforce against secured and unsecured assets.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Nandamuri Transporters Private… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 2OTH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.171 of 2O2S

¶5

Between:

¶6

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 authorized officer

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s. Nandamuri Transporters, Represented by its partners,

¶11

a) Nandamuri Srinivas,

¶12

s/o Late N. Rambabu

¶13

b) Smt N. Surekha,

¶14

w/o Late N. Ram Babu,

¶15

office at H. No.2-4- 1048/19, plot no.19, sy.No.133, samathapuri colony, LB nagar, Hyderabad, TS - 500 069.

¶16

Sri Nandamuri Srinivas, s/o Late N. Rambabu, aged about 42years, occ: business, male, R/o H.no, 12-1-485/EP, plot no.52, Dhanalaxmi colony, near Vishalandhra, nagole, Bandlaguda - 517 325. Also at H.No.2-4-lO4B/19, ffi plot no.19, sy.No.133, samathapuri colony, LB nagar, {., lrrr. /)t 20 ,lunrrx * Hyderabad, TS - 500 069. t\r% x ^^i,

¶17

(oA. No.171l202s)

¶18

SmtNandamuriSurekha, w/o Late N. Rambabu, aged about 61 years, female, R/o flat no.4O2,4th floor, Apoorva Residence, Raghavendra Colony, Kondapur, Rangareddy District - 500 084.

¶19

Also at

¶20

H. No.40- 15/1-9l 1, Sirisraju Street, Brundavan Colony, Labbipet, Venkateswarapuram, Vijayawada - 520 010.

¶21

Sri NandamuriUmadevi, w/o Sri N. Srinivas, aged about 40 years, occ: business, female, H.no. 12-1-485/Ep, plot no.52, Dhanalaxmi colony, near Vishalandhra, nagole, Bandlaguda - St7 325.

¶22

Also at

¶23

H. No.2-4- 1048/19, plot no.19, sy.No.133, samathapuri colony, LB nagar, Hyderabad, TS - 500 069.

¶24

Defendants

¶25

Counsel for the Parties:

¶26

For the Applicant

¶27

For the DeFendants

¶28

SmtTaranginiPisipati Expa rte

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The present OA against Defendants for recovery t89,OO5/-^(Rupees Six Crores Twenty nd and five only) i.e.,

¶31

(oA, No.171l202s )

¶32

a) A sum of Rs.4,15,04,L45/- with interest @ 11.55o/o p.a with monthly rests from 2L.04.2025 till the date of realisation;

¶33

b) A sum of Rs.2,10,84,860/- with interest @ 14.90% p.a with monthly rests from 21.04.2025 till the date of realization and in default for sale of lOhypothecated vehicles and mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule ,'A & B,,to OA.

¶34

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 is the pubric Limited company represented by its Directors defendants no.2 & 3 and defendants 2 & 4 stood as guarantors availed Rs.4.95 crores for purchase of 10 Ashok Leyland vehicles vide letter of arrangement dated L4.OZ.ZO23. The defendants executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation and guarantee agreement dated 16.03.2023. The defendants also mortgaged the schedure mentioned property in favour of Appricant bank' After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants faired to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA on 0g.01.2025 and recail notice was issued on 08.04.2025. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶35

A""rc;trsN
3, nfunts ca#S aosefrl\i
set exparte on 77.06.2025.
; zo;uHmI :
W.-

¶36

(oA. No.1711202s)

¶37

smtKalyaniRathod, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herserf as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.16.

¶38

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

Defendants remainedexparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and she exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.16. 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 claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶42

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.6,25,g9,OOS/_ (Rupees Six Crores Twenty Five Lakhs Eighty Nine Thousand and five

¶43

only) i.e.,

¶44

a)Asu x'%\ interest @ 11.55o/o p.a from 2t.o .e.025 till the date of rea ion; "#, ;^20JUilm :

¶45

Wt'td

¶46

(oA.No.17U202s)

¶47

b) A sum of Rs.2,10,84,860/- with interest @ 14.90olo p.a from 21.04.2025 till the date of realization

¶48

c) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated vehicles and mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule^..A & B" to OA towards realization of the debt due;

¶49

d) The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 4 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

g) Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶53

h) Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶54

(Drctated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th lune,2025)

¶55

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

20 JlJHm

¶57

truyx?
,Jif,$i';ffi'^,

State Bank of India v. M/S. Nandamuri Transporters Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Nandamuri Transporters Private Limited

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

State Bank of India versus M/S. Precise Design and Engineering

State Bank of India versus Mr. Chintal Somashekar Reddy

State Bank of India versus M/S.Veda Infrastructure

Canara Bank versus M/S. Phalanx Life Sciences

Canara Bank versus Sri. Thurpati Prakash Mutyamraj

State Bank of India versus M/S. Nandamuri Transporters