Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Karthikeya Traders

DRT24 Jul 2025OA/241/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Original Application before the DRT, Hyderabad, the bank sought recovery of a loan totaling approx. Rs.39.93 lakhs including interest. The bank asserted loan facilities were availed, the account was converted to NPA, and interest was not paid despite demands. The debtors were set ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

The respondents are directed to pay Rs. 39,93,138/- plus future interest and costs; a Recovery Certificate is to be issued.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Karthikeya Traders — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.241 OF 2025

¶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 Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s. Karthikeya Traders, A Proprietorsh ip concern Represented by its Proprietor, Mr. CherukuriVeerabhadra Rao, Off : ground floor, 2-3-322, Harakarawell street, Khammam- 507 001.

¶11

Mr. CherukuriVeerabhadra Rao, s/o Narasimha Rao, aged about 60 years, occ: business, male, R/o flat no.601, B block, CRPG Pa rad ise, Kavirajnagar, Khammam Urban, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam - 507 OO2.

¶12

Sri Cherukuri Santhosh Kumar, s/o Narasimha Rao, aged about 49 years, occ: business, male, R/o H.No.2-3-47, Gandhi gunj, - 507 002. -754, Manratha nagar,

Khanapuram 507 002.

2^rerr{ll ffigm

Defendants

(OA. No.2411202s)

Counsel for the Parties:

¶18

For the Applicant SmtTaranginiPisipati For the Defendants Expa rte

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against Defendants^for recovery of a total sum of Rs.39,93,138/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Ninety Three thousand One Hundred and Thirty Eight only) i.e.,

¶21

a) A sum of Rs.28,34,720l- with interest @ l2o/o p.a^(inclusive of penal interest @ 2olo ) with monthly rests from 01.05.2025 till the date of realization ;

¶22

b) A sum of Rs.11,46,872/- with interest @ 15olo p.a (inclusive of penal interest @ 2olo ) with monthly rests from 01.05.2025 till the date of realization ;

¶23

c) A sum of Rs.11,546/- with interest @ 11.25olo p.a (inclusive of penal interest @ 2olo ) with monthly rests from 01,05.2025 till the date of realization ;

¶24

and in default for sale of mortgaged property and hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶25

nts in the application, the Applicant Bank states 1 is a Proprietorship concern, represented by its proprietor and defendant no.3 stood as

¶26

¶27

(oA. N o.2a 1/2025)

¶28

guarantor to the loan facilities availed. The defendants availed loan of Rs.40.00 lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated 31.08.2019 and executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation and hypothecated the schedule mentioned movables in favour of Applicant bank. Defendant no.3 executed guarantee agreement guaranteeing the repayment of loan facility availed by defendants 1 and 2. Subsequently the defendants availed term loan of Rs.3.B8 lakhs on 17.07.2020 and mortgaged the schedule mentioned property. Again the defendants availed additional limit of Rs.10.00 lakhs on tt.01.2022. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on t7.7.2024 and recall notice was issued on 10.04.2025. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶29

Defendants called absent and set exparte on t4.07.2025.

¶30

Sri P. Prabhakar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.31.

¶31

Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶32

(OA.No.2411202s)

¶33

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶34

Defendants remainedexparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.31. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶35

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.39,93,L3t31- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Ninety Three thousand One Hundred and Thirty Eight only) i.e.,

¶36

a) A sum of Rs.28,34,720/- with interest @ 10o/o p.a from 01.05.2025 till the date of realization ;

¶37

b) A sum of Rs.tt,46,B72/- with interest @ 13olo p.a from 01.05.2025 till the date of realization ;

¶38

from -..)-..4;11,^{of Rs.11,546/- with interest@ 9.25%p.a} till the date of realization ;

¶39

¶40

(oA.No.241l202sl

¶41

The Applicant bank is entitied to proceed against the mortgaged property and hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due;

¶42

10' The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶43

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

¶44

t2. The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶45

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶46

t4. 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 July, 2025)

¶48

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶49

1.+
7" t JrrL zffi

¶50

OPY
d,;>t )-
Dit-l, rrYcs,q,4.g4'8-

State Bank of India v. M/s. Karthikeya Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Karthikeya Traders

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

State Bank of India versus Mr. Vishweshwar Rao Gunda

State Bank of India versus M/S. Azmeera Shantha Earth Movers

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Stephen Lamination Plant

State Bank of India versus Eco Auto Foam Industries

State Bank of India versus M/S. Novelty Reddy and Reddy Motors Private Limited

Sri Dommati Sai Krishna Rep by Poa Holder Dommati Sambaiah versus State Bank of India