Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Kishan Sudeer Singh

DRT2 Apr 2025OA/237/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed State Bank of India's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 52.20 lakh owed by a defaulting borrower on an NPA personal loan secured by mortgaged property, noting the unopposed evidence establishing liability.

What did the court decide?

Allows OA for sum of Rs. 52,20,083/- with interest. Entitles bank to proceed against mortgaged property and defendant's person/properties for realization. Awards costs to applicant.

State Bank of India versus Sri Kishan Sudeer Singh — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 2NDDAY OF APRTL, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.237 of 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

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

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri KishanSudheersingh, S/o Sri Kishan Singh, major, male, R/ o 1-8-604/ 1, Balasamudram, Hanumakonda, Warangal - 506 001.

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

For the Applicant

¶13

Sri P.V. Satyanarayana

¶14

DeFendant

¶15

Sri P.S.N. Ravindra

¶16

ORDER r"&\ , 1. The Toolicant k filed the present OA against DeFendant for : oz npn)rn i:i* recovery of a I sum of Rs.52,20,O83/- (Rupees Fifty Two ousand and Eighty Three only) with interest Rfo-n* with monthly rests from date of application till the date

¶17

(oA. No.237l2023 )

¶18

of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant personal loan of Rs.71.50 lakhs on 07.09.2016 against the mortgage of schedule mentioned property. The defendant executed security loan documents in favour of the Applicant bank. To secure due repayment of loan amount, the defendant executed agreement of loan and deposited the title deeds relating to OA schedule property bearing regd Sale deed no.1908/1999 dated 13.05.1999 and created equitable mortgage dated 04.10.2016.

¶20

It is submitted by the Applicant bank that the Defendants have availed the said loan facilities and failed to keep up the repayment schedule, as such the account was classified as NpA. Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendant has not regularized the account, and the Applicant bank issued legal notice dated 04.07.2023 but the defendant did not come forward to repay the same. The total claim of Applicant against defendants is of RS.52,2O,O83/- (Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Twenty Thousand and Eighty Three only) with interest @ 12.7o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization. Hence the

¶21

oA.
?^<br>r.kq
:, o2 APR2'6 *11
1., T/,
.",r :,.\ .<br>,s/,
\S,*r"fi$

¶22

(oA. No,237l2023 )

¶23

The Defendant filed written statement and denied the averments made in OA. The defendant denied the execution of alleged loan security documents in favour of Applicant Bank. It is submitted that thealleged statement of account is inadmissible in evidence as the same is not certified as per provisions of applicable statutes and not filed any alleged guidelines of RBI to substantiate the claim that the interest rate is charged as per the applicable guidelines. The defendant further contended that the claim of applicant is based on inadmissible documents where were executed on blank forms. Hence prayed for dismissal of oA. Defendant examined himself as DW.1 and filed Exhibit B.1.

¶24

I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶25

Heard the arguments.

¶26

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶27

i) Whether the Applicant Bank has proved its claim as made in inst the defendant ? re lief ? ffi; ;^{o2 tPRm..*} t. it !,rl * "p-#r aLakshmi, Manager/ AW.1 who was examined on fur,.'ffi# f of the Applicant clearly deposed about the liability of the

¶28

(oA.No.237 /20231

¶29

defendant. Exhibits A.1 to A.B exhibited by the Applicant bank clearly establish the liability of the defendant.

¶30

AW.1 was not cross examined by the defendant. Even though defendant examined himself as DW.1, his evidence is in noway helpful to him. The defendant having taken the plea that the applicant bank did not follow the RBI guidelines and that the present OA was barred by limitation, failed to place any substantial proof to that effect. Moreover, a perusal of the documents exhibited by the Applicant Bank makes clear that all the relevant documents are executed by the defendant in the normal course of transaction. The defendant very vaguely contended that particulars made in the OA are not correct. But as per the statement of accounts, the defendantis liable to pay the oA claim. considering all the circumstances, I am of opinion that the defense taken by the defendant is not tenable. Hence the applicant bank is entitled to claim the oA amount from defendant. Therefore, the oA claim deserves to be allowed against the defendant.

¶31

*w e res'ff$ e present Original application is allowed with costs as 0 2 uArffiZl[i * ? '^''"1'. d The oefenahi is liable to pay to Applicant Bank a total sum of "{ /-^(Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Twenty Thousand

¶32

(oA. No.23712023 )

¶33

and Eighty Three only) with interest 72.7o/o p.a from date of

¶34

application till the date of realization;

¶35

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property described in the schedule to oA towards the realization of the debt due.

¶36

10' The Applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶37

The Applicant Bank is entiued to the costs oF the OA.

¶38

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

¶39

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶40

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶41

(Drctated to the P A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me rn the open court on this the 2"dday of Aprit, 2025)

¶42

sd/-

¶43

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶44

O 2 ilPlutrj

¶45

fiRuFcoP/'-
("tt.?Ayffiv'
Ass{ Rsilsttrr
D .7-!, !?Ynr:,aABAD.

State Bank of India v. Sri Kishan Sudeer Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Kishan Sudeer Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kandhi Sharan

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kanaparthy Venkatesh

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Jeevan Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri. Pilla Krishna Mohan

mr sanjay kumar agarwal versus Punjab National Bank

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Vishnu Sai Enterprises