Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mrs. Kedari Shareen Pranitha

DRT21 Mar 2025OA/382/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against Mrs. Kedarishareen Pranitha for recovery of a home loan debt of approximately Rs. 67.70 lakhs with interest and costs, permitting action against mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Allowed OA with Rs. 67,69,951/- plus interest at 20.650% p.a., costs, and permission to proceed against mortgaged property and Defendant.

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Kedari Shareen Pranitha — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 21STDAY OF MARCH'2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PREsIDING oFFIcER

¶4

OA.No.382 ot 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stre-ssed Assets Recovery Branch, 2"" floor, TSRTC commuter Amenity Center, Bus terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M rs. Kedarishareen pranitha, W/o Mr. Phani Kiran, flat no.4O4, Plot no.14-17, padma Elysium, Nizampet, Kukatpally, Hyderabad - 5OO 072.

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the parties: For the Applicant For the Defendant

Sri C. Sreedhar

Ex^pa rte

ORDER

The Appricant Bank filed the present oA against Defendant for

¶16

r e cov e r y )ry&it.lWf$N :rb} n" . 67, 6s,s s 1 / - ( R u pees S ixty Seve n lakhs.6i{y :i ttninS,rnous'Sjt**in. ffi' * Hundred and fifty one onty) i:^;it' with ilitere tt'--*#1$monthrv rests rrom date orririns or [f-r"zt %,-rrry

¶17

(OA.No.382l2O2a)

¶18

oA ti' the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed home loan of Rs.57,75,0 OO/_ for purchase and construction of schedule mentioned property vide letter of arrangement dated 28.02.2018.The defendant executed memorandum of loan agreement and agreement of mortgage and memorandum of deposit of title deed dated 2B.O2.2OLB. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendant faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on 25.12.2023 and issued legal notice on 25'09'2024' Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶20

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 25.02.2025.

¶21

4' sri R. Loganathan, Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himserf as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.12.

¶22

Heard the Bank.

¶23

(oA. No.382/2024)

¶24

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?

¶25

Defendant remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW'1, official of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.12. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is enti'ed to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶26

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.67,69,951/-(Rupees Sixty Seven takhs Sixty nine Thousand Nine Hundred and fifty one only) with interest @ 70.650/o p.a from date of firing of oA tiil the date of rearization.

¶27

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

¶28

The Applicant to proceed against the person and prope 60"r" realization of the debt due. 21

¶29

(oA. No.382/2024)

¶30

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

¶31

12' The Appricant shail fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶32

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶33

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶34

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, siqned a rnd pronounced by me in the open court on this tne zr"i Jav Ji rvarch, 2025)

¶35

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶36

.ffi

¶37

aRuE FoPy
,1 94ffi
,ifffir'i'ioo'

¶38

State Bank of India v. Mrs. Kedari Shareen Pranitha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mrs. Kedari Shareen Pranitha

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 Panipat Jalandhar Nh Tollways Private Limited

Ms Varalakshmi Seed Processing Unit versus Bank of Baroda

Sathya Narayana Gande versus Irep Credit Capital Private Limited Rep by its Authorized Officer

M/s Sls Power Corporation ltd., versus M/s. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited

Canara Bank versus M/S. Siri Ayyappa Fertilizers

State Bank of India versus Sri Bonthu Ravinder Reddy