Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. Boinpally Venkatesh

DRT9 Apr 2025OA/399/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No.399 of 2024, the Debts Recovery Tribunal held that the bank established its claim against the defendant for a term loan default, allowing the OA with future interest, costs, and a right to proceed against hypothecated property.

What did the court decide?

The applicant bank is entitled to recover the sum with interest, proceed against the hypothecated property and personal assets for realization, and obtain the costs of the OA.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Boinpally Venkatesh — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrs rHE 9rH DAY oF APRrL' zozs

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.399 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Retail Assets & Small Medium Enterprises City Credit Centre, (RASMECCC), JPN Road, Warangal, Warangal district. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri BoinpallyVenkatesh, s/o Sri B. Sampath Rao, aged about 34 years, male, occ: business, H.No.35-3-427, road no,4, Arunodaya colony, Gopalpur, Hanmakonda - 506 001.

¶10

¶11

H.No.3-30-45, Kothulnaduma, Vall bhapur, Elkth urthi, Warangal - 505 476.

¶12

Defendant

¶13

Counsel for the Parties:

¶14

For the Applicant

¶15

For the

¶16

Sri G. PrabhakarSarma

Expa rte

(oA. No.399/2024)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.47,19,053,/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs Nineteen Thousand and Fifty Three only) with interest @ 10.65%^p.awith monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed term loan of Rs.44 lakhs for purchase of Mahindra Blazo 40TT 4XS CBC 856 vehicle vide letter of arrangement dated 25.04.2023. To secure due repayment of term loan, the defendant executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation dated 25.04.2023. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and issued legal notice on 08.10.2024. Inspite ofseveral requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶22

Defendant called nd set exparte on 27.02.2025.

¶23

Sri P. himself as

¶24

AW.1 and'exhibijed relevant marked as ii .Y s tPB 2.m,00 ,tlE Ex.A.1

¶25

(oA. No.399/202a)

¶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 Defendant as prayed for?

¶28

Defendant 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.10. 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 Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶29

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.47,L9,O53/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs Nineteen Thousand and Fifty Three only) with interest @ 10.650lo^p.afrom date of applicationtill the date of realization.

¶30

v. bank is entitled- to^proceed against the hypothecated in the schedule to OA towards realization of the

¶31

(oA.No.39e 12024)

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 9th day of April, 2025)

¶38

sdl - (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

trv, ^.3'"#i[1,i1{i,'-o

¶40

State Bank of India v. Sri. Boinpally Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. Boinpally Venkatesh

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sri. Talluri Hanumantha Rao

Indian Overseas Bank versus Yadiapalli Ramanadham (Died)

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Shiva Sai Seeds

State Bank of India versus M/S. Shanthi Aishwarya Industries LLP

Centegic Resources Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Jaithra Exim Private Limited versus State Bank of India