Allowed

State Bank of India v. S. Abhinay Kumar Reddy

DRT9 Sept 2025OA/340/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal considered an Original Application by State Bank of India for recovery of a home loan amount. The defendant denied the claim but failed to substantiate it with documents. The Tribunal found the bank's evidence sufficient, rejected the defense of limitation, and allowed the application.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the OA for recovery of Rs. 93,49,549/- plus interest at 9.55% p.a. and costs; directed issue of recovery certificate.

State Bank of India versus S. Abhinay Kumar Reddy — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE^grH DAy OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.34O of 2O24

¶4

Between :

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC commuter Amenity centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri S. Abhinay Kumar Reddy, S/o Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Flat no.s 303 & 304, "sahasra Sarovar", Isna pu r village, Isnapur GP, Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district, TS

¶9

Also at

¶10

60 MICMAC CRES, North^york on M2H 2K2, Toronto, Canada.

¶11

Also at:

¶12

State Street, 30 Adelaide Street, East Suite, H1 100, Toronto, Canada.

¶13

Defendant

¶14

Counsel for the

¶15

For the Sri C. Prabhakar Defendant Sri G.L. Prasada Rao

¶16

(oA. No.340/2024)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.93,49,S49l- (Rupees Nanety Three Lakhs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Forty Nine only) with further interest @ 9.55o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed home loan of Rs.1,14,00,000/- vide letter of arrangement dated 12.04.2023 for purchase of OA schedule property. To secure due repayment of aforesaid home loan, the defendant executed memorandum of loan agreement and created equitable mortgage on 13.04.2023 by way of deposit of sale deed no.LQ4O/2023 dated t2.04.2023. The defendant agreed to repay the home loan in equated monthly installment of Rs.99,998/- each from 15.05.2023. It is submitted by the Applicant bank that the Defendant has availed the said loan facilities and failed to keep up the repayment schedule, as such the account was classified as NpA. Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendant has not regularized the account, and the Appticant bank issued legal notice dated 30.08.2024,

¶20

but the d i rne forward to repay the same. The total claim ant is of Rs.93,49,549,/- (Rupees ne Thousand Five Hundred and Jn.r^s6pfuff"r,11 rri?j; .EP-.,, ,j;

¶21

(OA.No.340/2024)

¶22

Forty Nine only) with further interest @ 9.55o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization. Hence the oA.

¶23

2, The Defendant filed written statement and denied the averments made in OA. It is admitted that the defendant availed home loan from applicant bank and created mortgage of schedule property. It is submitted that the Applicant banl< have filed the OA with all false and baseless allegations and the applicant bank is put to strict proof of averments. It is contended that the applicant bank is authorized to capitalize the interest payable so as to amalgamate with the principal amount. Hence prayed for dismissal of OA, Defendant examined himself as DW.1 and not filed any documents.

¶24

I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶25

Heard the arguments.

¶26

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶27

i) Whether the Applicant Bank has proved its claim as made in OA

¶28

aga in st the defenda n t ? ...^....:'. ':'

ii) To what relief ?

Point No.i):

(oA. No.340/2024)

Sri Manjul Dixit, Manager/ AW.1 who was examined on behalf of the Applicant clearly deposed about the liability of the defendant. Exhibits A'1to A.9 exhibited by the Appricant bank crearry estabrish the riability of the defendant.

¶33

AW.1 was not cross examined by the defendant. Even though defendant examined himserf as DW.1 did not file any documents, hence his evidence is in noway helpful to him. The defendant having taken the plea that the Appricant bank capitarized the interest and that the present oA was barred by rimitation, faired to prace any substantial proof to that effect. Moreover, a perusar of the documents exhibited by the Applicant bank makes clear that all the relevant documents are executed by the defendant in the normal course of transaction. The defendant very vaguely contended that particulars made in the oA are not correct. But as per the statement of accounts, the defendant is liable to pay the oA craim. considering ail the circumstances, I am of opinion that the defense taken by the defendant is not tenabre. Hence the applicant bank is entitled to claim the oA amount from defendant. Therefore, the oA claim deserves to be allowed against the defendant.

¶34

Point No.ii)

¶35

B. In the
application is allowed with costs
unde
'!(
OgSEPruS

¶36

(oA. No.340/2024)

¶37

The Defendant ls llable to pay to App[cant Bank a total sum of Rs.93,49,549/- (Rupees Ninety Three Lakhs Forty Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Forty Nine only) with further interest @ 9.55o/o^p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization.

¶38

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶43

L4, Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶44

(Dictated to the P.A., traiiscribed by her, corrected, signcd and pronounced by me in the open court on this the^gth day of Sept'2025)

¶45

6ff<br>ii" o I stP 2t6 "li
W

¶46

COPY

¶47

sd/-

¶48

(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. S. Abhinay Kumar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. S. Abhinay Kumar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Sri Venkateshwara Rice Traders

Sri Sai Poultry versus Indian Overseas Bank

Kareem Syed versus Unity Small Finance Bank

State Bank of India versus Swastik Enterprises

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sri Venkateswara Emu Farm

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Sevalal Industry