Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Precise Design and Engineering

DRT19 Jun 2025OA/384/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No.384 of 2024, before the DRT-I, Hyderabad, the applicant bank claimed recovery of a defaulted cash credit, GECL loan, and outstanding dues totaling Rs.52,00,068 with interest, executed in 2021 and 2023. The respondents appeared ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability of respondents to pay Rs.52,00,068 with 15.40% p.a. interest and costs; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Precise Design and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.384 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch-II, 1't floor, Opp Sandhya theatre, RTC cross roads, chikkadpally, Hyderabad, Telangana State. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Precise Design and Engineering

¶10

Represented by its proprietor, R/o H.No.2-117, road no.5, Shobana colony, Balanagar, Hyderabad -500037.

¶11

Sri Bandi Sai Mohan,

¶12

s/o Sri Bandisudhakar Rao,

¶13

Prop of M/s. Precise Design & engineering aged about 42 years, R/o flat no,504, block-C,

¶14

H.No.5-5-51/B, Korukonda greens, Hitension line road, Vivekananda Nagar colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 072.

Defendants

Counsel for

For the

For t ;^,eruilm : WffiW

¶19

Ch. Dayakar Rao Expa rte

¶20

(oA.No.384i 2024)

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants^for recovery of a total sum of Rs.52,OO,O68/-^(Rupees Fifty^Two Lakhs and sixty eight only) with future^interest @^15.40olo P'a with monthly rests from date of application till^{the date of} rea lizatio n^.

¶23

As^per the averments in the^{application, the Applicant Bank states} that availed cash credit loan of^{Rs.42.00 lakhs vide letter of sanction} dated 10.03.2023 and^{executed agreement ofloan cum} hypothecation,^guarantee agreement^{etc on 10.03.2023.The} defendants also availed^{GECL loan of Rs.5,80,000/-on 28.12.2021} and executed supplemental^{agreement of loan cum hypothecation'} After availing the loan facilities, the^{defendantsfailed to complythe} terms of sanction,^{hencethe applicant bank classified the account} as NPA and legal notice^{was issued on05.09.2024. Inspite of} several requests and^{demands,the defendantsdid not clear the} outstanding. Hence^{this OA'}

¶24

Defendants called^{absentand set exparte on 28.05.2025.}

¶25

ger of the Applicant Bank examined re leva n t documents, which^are

¶26

,u,.o"d',13-., 1 {,d'n m ; foL

¶27

(OA. No.384/2024)

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶29

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?

¶30

Defendants remainedexparte. 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.19. 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 Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶31

B. ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.52,OO,06A/-^(Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs and sixty eight only) with future interest @ 15.40olo^p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶32

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to^proceed against the^person and properties of defendantNo.2 and^properties of defendant no.1 firm towa debt due.

¶33

The App costs of the OA.

¶34

(oA.No,38412024\

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶37

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19th June, 2025)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

{-.
d+"
, 19 JUIIM

AssL*cgilStrar
ANT-T, HYNERABAs

¶44

State Bank of India v. M/S. Precise Design and Engineering

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Precise Design and Engineering

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Mr. Krishna Venkatesh

M/S. Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation versus M/S. Jgb Enterprises

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri. Devara Suresh Rao

N Kesava Reddy versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus Mr. Madepalli Pratap Reddy

State Bank of India versus Mr. Chintal Somashekar Reddy