Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Hamsika Enterprises

DRT12 Nov 2025OA/420/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 55,32,091/- with interest against Hamsika Enterprises and Ms. Chanda Lavanya, holding the defendants liable to pay the debt and permit proceedings against hypothecated properties and assets.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 55,32,091/- with interest; bank entitled to salvage hypothecated property and personal assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Hamsika Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL -I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT: sRt cuMMADt coptcHAND, pREStDtNG oFFtcER

¶2

OA. No. 420 OF 2O2S

¶3

Between :

¶4

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Asset Recovery Branch, 2nd Floor, TSRTC Bus Terminal complex (commuter Amenity centre), Koti, Hyderabad - S0O Ogs Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s Hamsika Enterprises, Rep. by its Propreitor Smt. Chanda Lavanya, Female, Major,

¶8

H.No. 9-1 -22-1, Hasmathpet,

¶9

Hyderabad - 500 011.

¶10

Smt. Chanda Lavanya, Wo Chanda Srikanth, Female, Major, R/O H.No. 9-1-22-1, Hasmathpet, Hyderabad - 500 011

Defendants

1 ?_ il0tl ?trfi

(oA. No. 4201202s)

Counsel for the parties :

¶15

For The Applicant Sri. P.V Satyanarayana For the Defendant Exparte

¶16

Reserved on 07.11.2025 Pronounced on 12.11.2025 Upload in website on 13.11.2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendant nos. 1 and 2 for recovery of a total sum of Rs.S5,32,09i/_ (Rupees Fifty Five Lakhs Thifi Two Thousand and Ninety One Only) with future interest @ 12.15o/o p.a with monthly rests from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and in default for sare of Hypothecation of Movabres as mentioned in the schedure to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 is the propreitorship firm and the defendant no.2 is the proprietor of Defendant no. 1. The Applicant bank contended defendant No. 1 avalled CC(EDS) loan limit of Rs.75 Lakhs @ 1215% p.a with monthly rests and executed Agreement of loqn purniihy dated 27.06.2024 in favor of the a[plicarlt;"Lant.'b]ierroant no. 2 stood as guarantor and executed "ripri""nt'it"nI orfTrig?or$qreenneht dated 27.06.2025 in favor of the Appticant

(OA. No. 42012025)

Bank. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 07.07.2024 and issued legal notice on 19.09.2025. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA. Defendant called absent and set exparte on 07.1 1.2025.

¶29

Sri, Ganji Prasad, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.8.

¶30

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶31

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?

¶32

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiat of the Appticant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.g. ln view of the above, I hotd that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶33

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under :

¶34

The Defendant nos. 1 and 2 are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.SS,32,091/- (Rupees Fifty Five Lakhs Two Thousand and Ninety One Onty) with future interest, @ p.a from the date of filing of this applicqtion tillith6 c ' tr'..1

¶35

(OA. No. a20l202s)

¶36

The Applicant Bank is entifled to proceed against the Schedule Hypothecated^property as mentioned in Schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶37

The Applicant Bank is also entiiled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant no. 2 and the properties of Defendant No.^'1 towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶42

(Dictated lo..the^p A- transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open coud on this the^'l2rh day of Nov, 2025)

¶43

sd/(c. coPtcHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶44

T
a

¶45

State Bank of India v. M/S. Hamsika Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Hamsika Enterprises

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

Marisetti Venkata Krishna Rao versus Axis Bank

Bank of India versus Mr. Bhaskar Voruganti

Smt.Gorripati Padma Tulasi versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus Mr. Komatireddy Bhoji Reddy

Ismath Saniya versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Smt. Shaik Dilshad Begum