Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Svr Bricks Industry

DRT12 Feb 2025OA/434/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of loans against M/s. SVR Bricks Industry and associated individuals, finding the bank established its claim on documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to jointly and severally pay Rs.1,09,64,766/- with interest; power to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' assets granted; recovery certificate drafted.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Svr Bricks Industry — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE 12rH DAy OF FEBRUARY,2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.434 of 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Branch office at Stressed Assets Recovery branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC Commuter Amenity Centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095.

¶6

Represented by its authorized officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. SVR Bricks Industry, Represented by its^proprietor Smt G. Sujatha and G. Vara Lakshmi, H.No.3-5, KK Thanda, Bollepalle, BhongiriDist- 508 285.

¶10

Mrs. Guguloth Sujatha, W/o G. Goverdhan, Aged about 30 years, occ: business, Female, R/o H.No.3-5, KK Thanda, Bollepalle, BhongiriDist- 508 285.

¶11

MsGogulothVaraLakshmi, c/o G. Prakash, aged about 24 years, occ: business, female, R/o H.No.3-5, KK Thanda,

¶12

Bollepalle, BhongiriDist- 508 285.

¶13

GogulothLachiram, s/o G. Ragya, aged about 59 years, occ: business, male, R/o H.No.3-5, KK Thanda, Bollepalle, BhongiriDist- 5OB 285.

¶14

(o A.No.a3412024)

¶15

Also at:

¶16

H.No.14-253P & 254p, Block B, NFC Nagar, Ghatkesar village And municipality, Medchal Malkajgiridist- 501 301.

¶17

Defendants

¶18

Counsel for the Parties:

¶19

For the Applicant

¶20

For the Defendants

¶21

Smt Tarangini Pisipati Exparte

¶22

ORDER

¶23

1' The Applicant Bank Fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.L,O9,64,766l_ (Rupees One Crore Nine Lakhs sixty Four thousand seven hundred and sixty six only) i.e.,

¶24

a) A sum of Rs.82,23,593/- towards toan A/c. No.416000g2443 with interest @ 15.25olo p.awith monthly rests from 13.tL.2024 tilt the date of reallzation ;

¶25

b) A sum of Rs.27,4r,r73l- towards roan A/c. No.41658959474 with interest @ 16.250lo p.a with monthry rests from t3.rr.2024 tiil the date of realization ;

¶26

and in default for sale of Hypothecated movables and mortgaged

¶27

property edule "A & B" to OA. i'.S

¶28

As per the avertrntnl+ng,65e aopr tion, the Applicant Bank states that orship firm represented by its

¶29

(oA.No.a341202a)

¶30

proprietors/ defendants 2 & 3 and defendant no.4 stood as

¶31

mortgagor. The defendants 1 to 3 avaired cash credit loan for a sum of Rs.100 lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated 17.0L2O23. The loan facilities were secured by hypothecation of stocks more fully described in the schedure A to oA and coilaterar security of mortgaged immovable property more fully described in schedule B to oA. The defendants executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation, guarantee agreement dated 17.01.2023. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 13.09.2023 and issued recall notice dated 07.tt.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶32

Defendants 1 to 4 called absent and set exparte on 20.0L2025.

¶33

Smt K. GeetaLakshmi, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.9.

¶34

Applicant Bank.

¶35

{+ 6. The point tha eration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled f2trggncffi mat n the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶36

(OA. No.43al2024)

¶37

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.9. 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.

¶38

B. In 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.L,Ogt64,766l- (Rupees One Crore Nine Lakhs Sixty Four thousand Seven hundred and

¶39

Sixty Six only) i.e.,

¶40

a) A sum of Rs.82,23,593/- towards loan A/c. No.41600082443 with interest @ 15.25olo p.a from t3.LL.2024 till the date of realization;

¶41

b) A sum of Rs.27,4L,173l- towards loan A/c. No.41658959474 with interest @ 76.250/o p.a from 13.tt.2024 till the date of realization;

¶42

is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated ged property as described in the schedule lization of the debt due.

¶43

;o*ur^l" Prt'2ffi"''

¶44

(oA. No.43412024)

¶45

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed aga inst the person

¶46

and properties of defendants No.2 to 4 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶50

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶51

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of Feb,2025)

¶52

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶53

/&d.r,
'*3 12 FEBm
' zrl
7'

¶54

,[RUE $OPY , -
(Vs-44
Asst. *{n^[1"
ORI.I, HYDEq,'!.8 ' O.

State Bank of India v. M/s. Svr Bricks Industry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Svr Bricks Industry

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

Similar cases

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/s. Suyati Impex Private Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Devarashetty Kavitha

Ms Chelpuru Brothers Cloth Sotres versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)

State Bank of India versus M/S. Vamsi Furniture World

Smt Bandi Surya Bhavani versus Hdfc Bank

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Sri. Giridhar Goud Ramgoni