Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Suryanarayana Kammara

DRT16 Sept 2025OA/287/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of a stressed asset arising from an express credit Elite facility. The defendant, being absent, did not contest the evidence of the bank witness or the validity of the loan documents, leading the court to uphold the claim.

What did the court decide?

The applicant bank is authorized to recover Rs. 23,83,830/- with future interest. A recovery certificate was issued to proceed against the defendant's property.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Suryanarayana Kammara — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBE& 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.287 OF 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch-2, RTC Cross road, Chikkadpalli, Hyderabad, Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Mr. Suryanarayana Kammara, s/o K. Anjaneyulu, aged 54 years, occ: Railway employee, R/o H.No.Rly Qtr 1154/8, Shanti nagar, Near Railway hospital, Guntakal, Ananthapur - 515 801.

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

For the Applicant Sri Hari Prasad Podila For the Defendant Exparte

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery

¶15

of a total sum of Rs.23,8&E3Q/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs ._^{-:j-.;.-.,::, .".r...} Eighty rhree rhgu$g''tu{Jght, tl:S{ed and rhirty only) with 'i' i:r -"i 11 future interest @ 14.15% h.& witnifio\tnty rests from date of apprication tiil thq illoutS & f,6fri2fl5on.^*

¶16

1.rt

¶17

(OA. No.287l202s)

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed credit facility of Rs.23,25,000/- under xpress credit Elite facility on 15.12,2023 and agreed to repay in 72 EMIs of Rs,45,636/- per month. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 30.04.2025. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 22.0g.2025.

¶20

Sri K.P. Rao, Managerof theApplicantBankexamined himself asAW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex,A.1 to A.9.

¶21

5, Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶22

6' The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendant as prayed for?

¶23

Defendant remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.Al to A.9. In view of the above, I hold that the Apphcant Bank has established their claim made 'i--' ,^: a r!

¶24

in the OA against.,the Oefertbai\t and hence the Applicant Bank is ,.^tc#Fiffi*ri

¶25

,,,',. ,.+ .. :.. ,.,, ..1 .,t: 2 ..:.. ,"ir...... . . ;, :., - :...^,:_......,

¶26

' :"i ': ' -" .-_:.::)--.:.-,-

¶27

(oA.No.287l202s)

¶28

entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶29

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

¶30

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.23,83,830/(Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eighty Three

¶31

Thousand Eight Hundred and Thirty only) with future interest @ l4.L5o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶32

The Applicant Bank is also entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

12, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16h day of Sept, 2025)

¶38

16stPm6

¶39

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER ':::m", 6.r.I-1. Hyori,,!^{i t} :'.,

State Bank of India v. Mr. Suryanarayana Kammara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Suryanarayana Kammara

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

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Medi Suvarna

B.Venkat Ramulu versus Canara Bank

Smt Syed Arshi Naaz versus Tirumala Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Asthana Agri Genetics Private Limited

Canara Bank versus Ma Zaveri Jewellers

State Bank of India versus Mr. Ellendula Venu