Allowed

State Bank of India v. Shiva Wire Industries, Rep by Its Proprietor

DRT25 Aug 2025OA/314/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by the State Bank of India against Shiva Wire Industries and its proprietor. The Defendants were summoned, appeared ex parte, and no representation was filed. The Tribunal held that the claim was well-founded on evidence and ordered the Defendants to pay the principal sum with future interest, costs, and proceedings against hypothe

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 51,57,496/- with future interest, costs, issue of Recovery Certificate, and permission to proceed against hypothecated assets.

State Bank of India versus Shiva Wire Industries, Rep by Its… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE^{25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025}

¶2

PRESENT: SH.^{RAMESHWAR KOTHE,B.COM.,L.LB. (HONS.),M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{No: 314 OF 2025}

¶4

State Bank of^India., SMECC Branch,^Cyberabad No. 12-6-39lA/2F,^{Y Junction} Kukatpally, Hyderabad -⁵⁰⁰⁰⁷² Medchal - Malkajgiri^District. Rep' by its chief Manager'

¶5

""^Applicant'

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shiva Wire^Industries., Rep by its Proprietor,^{D.No.07-077luuNR} Ground Floor, Part/A,^{NA, Subashnagar} Jeedimetla, Quthbullapur^{Mandal,Medchal} Malkajgiri District,^{Hyderabad-500055.}

¶8

Smt.Yerra Jyoshna,^{W/o'YerraKamalakar} Female, Major,^{proprietor of Shiva Wire} Industries, D. No.07-077l1/1/NR Ground Floor, Part/A,^{NA, Subashnagar} leedimetla, Quthbullapur^{Mandal,Medchal} Malkajgiri District,^{Hyderabad-500055.}

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

H.No.281l14, S R Naik^Nagar,IDA Jeedimetla, Medchal^{Malkajgiri District} Hyderabad - 500055.

¶11

...Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr.P.V.Satyanarayana

Defendants

: Ex-Darte

OY'**

oA.NO.314/202s

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.51.57,496/_ towards CC Loan Limit from the defendants joinily and severally with future interest @14.4[ok p.a. monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default For sale of hypothecated assets.

¶20

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They

¶21

were set ex_parte on 07.07.2025 as called absent and no

¶22

representation.

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined Bu rra Raj Sumanth Kumar, Chief

¶24

Manager, as AW-1 and marked 0g documents through him as

¶25

Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.08.

¶26

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the

¶27

material placed on record.

¶28

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶29

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the cta. t n e o e re n # n[" : :, Zff :;r; : :::: assets 7

¶30

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.0B marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the craim of the Appricant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs. ,Arr*n rV{'ov:,9

¶31

oA.NO.314/2025

¶32

' 7. In the result, the present Original Application No.31412025 is allowed as under:^-

¶33

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.51,57,496l- towards CC Loan Limit with future interest @12.40olo^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶34

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶35

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the person and^properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶36

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶37

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th Day of August, 2025).

¶40

frY*w lnAi(rsnwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Shiva Wire Industries, Rep by Its Proprietor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Shiva Wire Industries, Rep by Its Proprietor

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

Sri vijaykumar versus Bank of Maharashtra

Ski Metal Craft versus Bajaj Finance Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/S. K.S. Care Hospital

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Swathi Dental Manufacturer

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mohammadmahdi Kelidari

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Padmavathi Industry