Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Maruthi Oil Stores and Electrical Parts

DRT17 Feb 2025OA/216/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

... The applicant bank filed an Original Application for recovery of a default CC loan, GECL loan, and FITL with interest. The Tribunal found the bank established its claim through the manager's examination and document evidence. The Tribunal adjudged the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the principal and interest.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the applicant bank a total sum of Rs. 21,24,581 along with future interest and costs.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Maruthi Oil Stores and… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE 17rH DAy OF FEBRUARy,2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.216 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC bus terminal complex, (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti, Hyderabad, TS. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Maruthi Oil Stores & Electrical parts, Represented by its proprietor Sri Bandi Sampath, male, major, D.No.6-3-99, Mahadevpur "X" roads, parkal, Warangal district - 506 164.

¶9

Also at

¶10

H.No. 18-66, Gouda Veedhi, Parkal, Mahadevpur',X,, roads, Parkal, Warangal district _ 506 164.

¶11

Sri BandiSampath, s/o Sri Kanakaiah, male, major, R/o d.No.6-3-99, Mahadevpur "X" roads, Parkal, Warangal district - 506 164.

¶12

Mr. T. Venkateshwarlu, s/o Sri T. Agaiah, major, male,

¶13

R/o H.No.4-140, cross road (main Parkal, Warangal district - 506 16

¶14

rFB 2f,[

¶15

(oA.276120241

¶16

SmtBandiSwarupa, w/o Sri Bandisampath, female, major, D.No.6-3-99, Mahadevpur "X" roads, Pa rka l, Warangal district - 506 164.

¶17

Also at

¶18

H. No. 1B-66, Gouda Veedhi, Parkal, Mahadevpur "X" roads, Parkal, Warangal district - 506 164.

¶19

Defenda nts

¶20

Counsel for the Parties:

¶21

For the Applicant

¶22

For the Defendants

¶23

Sri P.V. Satyanaryana Expa rte

¶24

ORDER

¶25

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.21,24,5g1/_ (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Twenty Four Thousand Five Hundred and Eighty one only) i.e.,

¶26

a) A sum of Rs.16,64,027/- towards CC loanwith interest @ 14,g0o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization ;

¶27

b) A sum of Rs.1,89,352/- towards GECL loan with interest @ 9.40o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization ;

¶28

c) A sum of Rs.2,71,202/- with interest @ 9.40% p.a from date of

¶29

application till realization;

¶30

ed property as described in the

¶31

?rr$[m

¶32

loA.2L6l2024)

¶33

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.2 is the proprietor of defendant no.1 firm avaired cash credit of Rs.3.00 rakhs on 05.06.2013 and executed necessary security roan documents in favour of Appricant bank. subsequenfly, the cash credit was enhanced to Rs.10.00 lakhs on 30.06.2014. Defendants 3 & 4 stood as guarantors and defendants 1 to 3 executed necessary documents vide retter of arrangement dated 03.12.2015. Again the cc rimit was enhanced to Rs.15.00 rakhs on 07.03.2017. Defendant no.4 deposited the tiile deed bearing Regd. Sale deed no.235Bl1997 relating to the mortgaged property more fully described in the schedure to oA. The defendants avaired GECL loan of Rs.2.93 lakhs on 04.06.2020 and additional loan FITL of rs'4'20 rakhs on 29.09.202r. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants falled to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 04.0t.2023 and issued demand notice dated 02.02.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶34

Defenda absent and set exparte on 24.10.2024.

¶35

6
*ds

¶36

(oA.21,6/2O241

¶37

4' Sri s.V.S. prathik yadav, Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.26.

¶38

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶39

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

7' Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.26. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabtished their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entiued to recover the craim 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.21,24,5g1/_ (Rupees Twenty

¶43

One Lakhs T Thousand Five Hundred and Eighty

¶44

one on

¶45

IP

I 7 rr8 x,t25
rF.
' 14. i."t ,e.#;l

¶46

(oA.2L6/2024\

¶47

a) A sum of Rs.16,64,027/_ towards CC loan with interest @

¶48

L4.Blo/op.a from date of application tiI the date of realization

¶49

b) A sum of Rs.1,89,352/- towards GECL toan with interest @ 9.40o/o p.a from date of apprication tiil the date of rearization ;

¶50

c) A sum of Rs.2,71,202/- with interest @ 9.40olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization ;

¶51

The Applicant bank is entiUed to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in the schedure to oA towards rearization of the debt due.

¶52

The Appricant Bank is arso entired 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.

¶53

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

¶54

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

¶55

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶56

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶57

t^her' corrected, siened and pronounced bv me in the open court on &ffid:;;;';i*

¶58

rRUE coPY
aVrhn
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAT
FbYDFRABAD

¶59

sd/(G. GOP]CHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/s. Maruthi Oil Stores and Electrical Parts

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Maruthi Oil Stores and Electrical Parts

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

Similar cases

Smt D Geetha Bharath versus Telangana Grameena Bank

Mr Abdul Raheem Mohd versus Iifl Housing Finance Limited

Mr Abdul Hafeez Mohd versus Iifl Housing Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus M/s. Ssr Hospitals

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S. Rishabh Plastic

State Bank of India versus M/s. Sri Krishna Seeds