Allowed

Small Industries Development Bank of India (Sidbi)) v. M/S. Royal Engineers

DRT13 Jun 2025OA/327/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DR Tribunal allowed the Section 34 application filed by SIDBI for recovery of a loan sum of approximately Rs. 4.73 crores against the borrower and guarantors, holding them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 4,72,94,715/- with future interest and penal charges; entitled to proceed against secured properties and persons of respondents.

Small Industries Development Bank of India (Sidbi)) versus… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE 13rH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.327 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI), Specialized Asset Recovery Branch, (SARB)Asset Recovery Vertical Unit, Branch office at G-1, Akirasikhara Apartments, 5-B-19 to 20, lambagh, Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶6

Represented by its authorized officer/ AGM

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Royal Engineers, Represented by its proprietor Sri Devireddy Chandrasekhar Reddy, #2- L-8- 133 /NR, Saraswathi nagar Colony, Nagole road, Uppal, Medchal - Malkajgiri dist - 500 039.

¶10

Sri Devireddy Chandrasekhar Reddy, s/o Shri Venkateswara Reddy Devireddy, villa no.2l2, Indu aranya, Indu Haritha, Nagole, Near Bus depot, Hayathnagart, Bandlaguda, GSI (SR), RR dist, Telangana - 500 068.500 068.068.

¶11

Telangana - 500 068.500 068.068.
"eN
3. Smt Devireddy Poornima, 6% 'A
w/o Devireddy Chandrasekhar
female, aged major, occ: hou
#3'',, ,
villa no.212, Indu aranya, Ind at;
Nagole, Near Bus depot, Haya
Bandlaguda, GSI (SR), RR dist,
Telangana - 500 068. &,"**#

¶12

lOA.No.327 /20241

¶13

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant For the Defendants

Sri P. Bhiksheshwar

Exparte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.4,72,94t715/- (Rupees Four Crores Seventy Two Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifteen only) i.e.,

¶18

a) a sum of Rs.3,96,60,802/- under loan A/c. with future interest @ 10.55% p.a with monthly rests and penal charges of 2o/o p.a from 10.08.2024 till the date of realization;

¶19

b) a sum of Rs.76,08,413l-with interest @ g.25olo p.a with monthly rests and penal charges @ 2olo p.a from lO.OB.2024 till the date oF realization;

¶20

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

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.2 is the proprietor of defendant no.1 who availed term loan of Rs.330.00 lakhs vide letter of intent dated t7.L2.2Otg.

¶22

Defenda nt as guarantor cum mortgagor for the financial ASSI ant no.1. The defendants executed loan ffifi& agr =fl"n|,^{personal guafan} ,^deed of^{hypothecation,} etc in favour of s,,.ul.LJ.lll!4""" t no.3 created mortgage of schedule eeds n respect of immovable property R^:r;*S-$P

¶23

(OA.N1.327120241

¶24

more fully described in the schedule to oA. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank crassified the account as NpA and demand notice was issued on 28.02.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence thrs oA.

¶25

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 24.04.2025, 4. Sri C. Anukarshan, Asst. General Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.25.

¶26

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶27

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?

¶28

Defendants 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.A1 to A.25. 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 Appricant Bank

¶29

is entitled to recove.r:thLclaim made in the on with future interest ".0."*y46qrq.\ B. ;.",:::K#^";.ffi,,;N"-"d with costs, as under: i;^lrJtlllz0r : .:. .. ,j

¶30

loA.No.327 /20241

¶31

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.4,72,94,7151- (Rupees Four Crores Seventy Two Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifteen only) i.e.,

¶32

a) a sum of Rs.3,96,60,802/- under loan A/c. with future interest @ 10.55olo p.a from t0.08.2024 till the date of realization;

¶33

b)a sum of Rs.76,08,413l- with interest @ 8.25o/o p.a from 70.08.2024 till the date of realization;

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

Issue Recovery certiFicate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶40

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribedby her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13ih June, 2025)

¶41

ffi
..L
,i'jN
:" l-]. )

¶42

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRES!D!NG OFFICER

Small Industries Development Bank of India (Sidbi)) v. M/S. Royal Engineers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Small Industries Development Bank of India (Sidbi)) v. M/S. Royal Engineers

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Sri Sai Poultry Farm

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Nama Narsi Reddy

Mr.Narasimha Reddy Kasireddy versus Karnataka Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus Mr. Aadepu Venkateshwarlu

Smt Chellaboyana Sri Laxmi versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Vani Educational Society