OA allowed to State Bank of India for recovery of Rs.21,25,495/- plus future interest and costs from defendant. Relief includes recovery certificate and sale of mortgaged property.
Defendant liable to pay Rs.21,25,495/- with future interest less Rs.1,21,555/- received. Bank entitled to sale of mortgaged property, costs, and issue of recovery certificate.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH' 2025
PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER
OA.No.3O6 of 2023
Between:
State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC commuter emenity Center, Bus terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Represented by its Chief Manager
Applicant
VERSUS
Sri BonthuRavindra Reddy, S/o Sri B. Venkat Reddy, Aged about 53 years, O.cc: business, R/o flat no.512, 5rh floor, Silver Springs Apartment, Venkateswaranagar colony, Chintal, Quthubullapur village And mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri District - 500 054.
Or
R/o H.No.7-04t9, plot no.515/part In survey no.24L, subhashnagar, Jeedimetla village, Medchal Malkajgiridist - 500 055.
Defendant
Counsel for theparties:
For the Applicant For the Defenda ,ffi\ k ?1I[fizSE : W,r-ry
Ch. Dayakar Rao
Exparte
(oA. No.306/2023 )
ORDER
2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant avairedhome roan under Term roan facirity for a sum of Rs.24,40,000/- vide letter of arrangement dated 18.07.2017. As a security the defendant mortgaged the immovable property and deposited the tifle deeds of schedule mentioned property. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendant faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA and issued legal notice on 28.09.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.
(oA. No.306/2023 )
Ex.A.1 to A.10. The Applicant Bank filed part satisfaction memo stating that a sum of Rs.1,21,555/- was received on 20,09.2024.
entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant as prayed for?
B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is riable to pay to the Appricant Bank a totar sum of Rs.21,25,495/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Twenty Five thousand Four Hundred Ninety Five only) with future interest @ B.4olo p.afrom date of apprication tiil the date of realizationLEss a sum ofRs.1,2L,55Sl- received on 2O.O9.2O24.
zd<br>t
* 21 [[9 'fl?('
W,#J
(oA. No.306/2023)
property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of
the debt due.
and properties of defendant towards rea lization of the debt due.
of receipt of order.
( Dictated to the p.A., court on this the 21.t transcribed by her, corrected. signed and pronounced by me in the open day of March, 2025)
sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER
\i
? 1 t{[R 2U6 . i;
:*,r,4,ffi
It'.ffry*
,#1,1;8Jf'1fl^"
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant bank is entitled to the recovery of claims in the OA against the defendant?
Whether the bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property and person for realization of debt?
State Bank of India
Gummidi Gopichand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
