Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Hanuman Automotives

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/545/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of dues totaling Rs.98.39 lakhs including cash credit and WCTL limits against three defendants who were present ex-parte. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable and allowed mortgage proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.98,39,884.74 with future interest; OA claim secured by mortgage; bank can proceed against defendants' properties for realization of dues.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Hanuman Automotives — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAIVIESHWAR KOTHE, B,Com., L.LB.^(HONS.), M.A.

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 545 OF 2025

¶6

State Bank of India., SARB Bra nch, Vijayawada Krishna District.

¶7

Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶8

.....Applica nt.

¶9

Versus

¶10

M/s. Hanuman Automotives.,

¶11

Rep by its Managing Partner

¶12

Mr. Dhayam Raghava Reddy

¶13

D. No.131388- 10-c-5, Near New ITI Pulivendula Road, Vempally

¶14

YSR Kadapa District, A.P - 516350.

¶15

Mr. Dhayam Raghava Reddy

¶16

S/o. Mr. Dhayam Pedda Hanumanthu

¶17

D. No.13/388- 10-c-5, Near New ITI

¶18

Pulivendula Road, Vempally YSR Kadapa District, A.P - 516350.

¶19

Mr. Dhayam Varalakshmi

¶20

W/o. Mr. Dhayam Raghava Reddy D. No.13/388- 10-c-5, Near New ITI Pulivendula Road, Vempally ...Defendants

¶21

YSR Kadapa District, A.P - 516350.

¶22

: Mr. A. M. Kiran Kumar

¶23

Counsel for the Applicant

¶24

Defendants : Ex-Parte

¶25

:: (LLD-L& ::

¶26

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a^total sum of Rs.98,39,884.74ps i.e., E.sum of^{Rs.72,597.69ps} //W*

¶27

()/

¶28

oA.NO.545/202S

¶29

towards Cash Credit Limit with future interest @16,750lo p.a. and a sum of Rs.97,67,287.05ps towards WCTL Limit with future interest @19.75olo p.a, from the defendants jointly and severally with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule properties.

¶30

Summons served on D1 to 3 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 04.09.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶31

The Applicant Bank examined Sudhakar Kotcherla, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 11 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.11.

¶32

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.^perused the material placed on record.

¶33

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶34

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule Properties?

¶35

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.11 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are join y and severally tiable to^pay the OA claim to the Appliclnt Bank with future interest and costs. fu"g

¶36

oA.NO.s4sl202s

¶37

In the result, the present Original Application No.545/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶38

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.98,39,884.74ps i.e., the defendants 1 to 3 are^jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.72,597.69ps towards Cash Credit Limit and the defendants 1 & 2 are^jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.97,67,287.05ps towards WCTL Limit; with future interest @11.30% p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realizatlon;

¶39

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶40

iii) the applicant bank ls also entitled to^proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶41

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶42

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶43

Issue Recovery certiflcate accodi^glyy'r\y,\ .h

¶44

oA.NO.s45/2025

¶45

¶46

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19th Day of November, 2025). mr*- .

¶47

1/'{'r*Nrn

¶48

(*TMESHWAR KoTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/S. Hanuman Automotives

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Hanuman Automotives

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sree Vmk Hotels

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Renuka Steel and Hardware

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mythri Techno Solutions Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Gangaram Krishna Reddy

Canara Bank versus M/s. Faheem Plastics.

The Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Boddu Sushman Reddy