Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Sri Krishna Seeds

DRT17 Feb 2025OA/444/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of an outstanding MSME loan of Rs.45,81,693 with interest and costs, enabling action against hypothecated and mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed with costs. Respondents liable to pay principal, interest at 14.25% p.a., and costs. Recovery certificate issued to proceed against secured assets.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Sri Krishna Seeds — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 17rH DAy OF FEBRUARY,2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.444 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC bus terminal complex, (Commuter Amenity Centre), Koti. Hyderabad, TS. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Sri Krishna Seeds, Rep by its^proprietor Smt M.V. Krishna Kumari, w/o Kondaiah, H.no.13-193/3 B, Signal Gadda, Badepally village, Jadcherla Mandal, Mahabubnagardist, TS- 509 301.

¶9

Also at

¶10

R/o H.No.13-147/A, Srinivas Nagar Colony, Jadcharla, Mahabubnagar-509 301.

¶11

Smt M.V. Krishna Kumari, W/o Kondaiah, aged 68 yrs, Occ: business, female, R/o H.No.13-I47/A, Srinivas Na Colony, Jadcharla, Mahabubnagar-509 301.

¶12

Also at H.No.13-193/3 B, Signat Gadd Badepally village, Jadcherla Mandal, Mahabubnagar dist-509 Defenda nts

¶13

loA.444/2024)

¶14

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶15

Smt Tarangini Pisipati Exparte

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1' The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.45,81,693/- (Rupees Forty Five Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Six Hundred and Ninety Three only) with interest @ L4.25o/o p.awith monthly rests from 27.11.2024 till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables and mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is the proprietorship firm represented by its proprietor/ defendant no.2 availed MSME loan of Rs.40.00 lakhs vide arrangement letter dated tB.OB.2022. The defendants hypothecated the movables and mortgaged property as described in the schedule A and B to OA. The defendants executed agreement of loan cum hypothecation and deposited.. the title deeds dated 78.08.2022. facilities, the defendants failed to compry ,n" {$ nce the applicant bank was "t constrained rto* as NPA on 28.02.2024 and issued o-trc,q dateO t9. 1 1i?024 Inspite of several req u ests *<;;m:t#r'

¶19

loA.444/2024)

¶20

and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶21

Defendants called absent and set exparte on L2.OZ.2O2S.

¶22

Sri S.V.S, Prathik^yadav, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.12.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶25

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶26

Defendants 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.12. 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.

¶27

B. In the the resent OA is allowed with costs, as under: The and severally liable to pay to the , TL\ AppliganB-"Bank of Rs.45,81,693/- (Rupees Forty Five: takhd sand Six Hundred and Ninety

¶28

loA.444/2024)

¶29

Three onty) with interest @ 14.25% p.a from 27,tI.2024 till the date of realization;

¶30

9' The Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated movables and mortgaged property as described in the schedule to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶31

The Appricant Bank is arso entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶32

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

¶33

t2. The Appricant shaI fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶34

13, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶35

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶36

(Dictated to the p A , transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th day of Feb,2O2S)

¶37

,{ ''i.
t"
,ffi

¶38

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

rRft coPY
._--.,
o,,,,ffgfffi'"*o'

State Bank of India v. M/s. Sri Krishna Seeds

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Sri Krishna Seeds

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

Smt D Geetha Bharath versus Telangana Grameena Bank

Mr Abdul Raheem Mohd versus Iifl Housing Finance Limited

Mr Abdul Hafeez Mohd versus Iifl Housing Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus M/s. Ssr Hospitals

State Bank of India versus M/s. Maruthi Oil Stores and Electrical Parts

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S. Rishabh Plastic