Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Kumar Aquatech Agencies Private Limited

DRT20 Jun 2025OA/72/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SBI filed OA to recover debt from directors and shareholders of a company dissolved by NCLT. The Tribunal allowed the OA, holding the personal guarantors jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants 2-6 jointly and severally liable to pay Rs 11,76,74,087.72 with pendent-lite interest; claim against D/1 dissolved; attachment made absolute; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Kumar Aquatech Agencies… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 2OrH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA,No.72 ol 2022

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Branch-II, D.No.3-4-1013/A, I't floor, CAC, TSRTC Bus station, Kachiguda, Hyderabad, TS - 500 027. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1, M/s. Kumar Aquatech Agencies Private Limited, Regd office at 8-3-991,

¶10

Flat no.202, Kamala Residency, Opp SBI, Srinagar colony, Hyderabad - 500 073.

¶11

And also at

¶12

No.3-200, Kaikaluru road, Someshwaram, Krishna dist.

¶13

Sri NimmalapudiDurga Prasad, s/o N. Lakshmanarao, Director M/s. Kumar Aquatech Agencies Pvt ltd, H.No.4-106, Kalyana Mandapamveedhi, Rajavolu, Rajahmundry, AP - 533 124.

¶14

SriKadiyalaSankarBabu, s/o KadiyalaVenkateswara Rao, director M/s. Kumar Aquatech Agencies Pvt Ltd, H.no.904/10A, Jaffer Alibagh, Near water tank, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 33.

¶15

ffi'
74<br>llat
AF Bi;,,

2 0 JUN2ffi

¶16

\oA.No.72l2O22l

¶17

Sri NerellaHemanth Naga Kumar, S/o NerellaVenkata Ram Mohan rao, Aged 31 years, D.No.,17-74, chilukuri Vari street, Akiveedu, West Godavari Dist, AP - 534 235.

¶18

20- 105/ l-8, Viveka ndanagar, Opp ZP High School, Akividu, West Godavari, AP - 534 235

¶19

1-3382, flat no.61,RTC Colony, Tirumalagiri, Secunderabad - 49.

¶20

SmtNerella Sujatha, w/o NerellaVenkata Ram Mohan Rao, aged 55 years, D.No.17-74(3), Chllukurivari street, Akiveedu, West Godavari District, AP- 534 235

¶21

And also at

¶22

D.No.20-40, Vivekananda nagar, Opp ZP High School, Akividu, West Godavari, AP -534 235

¶23

1-3382, flat no.61,RTC Colony, Tirumalagiri, Secunderabad - 49.

¶24

Sri NerellaVenkata Ram Mohan Rao, s/o NerellaRamulu, aged 60 years, 20- 105/ 1-8, Vivekandanagar, Opp ZP High School, Akividu, West Godavari, AP - 534 235

¶25

1-3382, flat no.61,RTC Colony, Tirumalagiri, Secunderabad - 49.

¶26

Defendants

¶27

Counsel for the Parties:

¶28

For the

¶29

Sri N. Meher Prasad

¶30

For the
b*u
g Z0,tunWn *
W,-gg

Expa rte

loA.No.72/2022)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.t1,76,74,087.7Lps (Rupees Eleven Crores Seventy Six Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Eighty seven and paase seventy one only) with pendent-lite interest @ t0.40o/o p.a with monthly rests apart from penal interest @ 2o/o p.afrom 24.02.2022 till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶35

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 is a private limited company of which defendants 2 and 3 are its Directors. Defendants No.4,5 and 6 are shareholders of defendant no.1 company. The defendants no. 4 to 6 along with defendants no.2 & 3 guaranteed the repayment of loans granted by Applicant bank. The defendant no.1 company availed cash credit of Rs.9.75 crores on 25.10.2016 and executed loan documents and^personal guarantees. On 30.03.2021^pursuant to sanction, after creation of separate loan accounts for working capital demand loan of Rs.597 lakhs, FITL-I of Rs.59 lakhs and FITL-II of Rs.36 lakhs, a sum of Rs.3,78,84,223l- remained outstanding upto 30.03.202t. ecated the stocks of^prawn feed, .s debts and created mortgage of as mentioned in the schedule to ?'d":EftdflH'

¶36

(oA.No.72l2o22l

¶37

OA.The cash credit facilities were restructured by converting the irregular outstanding amount of Rs.597 lakhs into working capital term loan. Renewal of cash credit with reduced limit of Rs.378 lakhs, funded interest term loan-I of Rs.59 lakhs and funded interest term loan-Il of Rs.36 lakhs to be repaid with interest. The defendants deposited the title deeds of schedule mentioned properties. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA and demand notice was issued on 30.06.2021. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶38

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 13.05.2022.

¶39

Sri G. Suresh Babu, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.49. The Applicant bank filed a memo stating that Hon'ble NCLT passed orders in Company petition lB/27512021 on 18.1O.2O23 dissolved the Corporate debtor i.e., M/s. Kumar Aquatech Agencies pvt Ltd (Defendant no.1)

¶40

Heard the Ld plicant Bank.
4tla
&
.!
s 20 uuZW

¶41

(oA.No.72l2022)

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Defendants remainedexparte. 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.49. 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.

¶45

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants No.2 to 6 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.11,76,74,Ogl.ZLps (Rupees Eleven Crores Seventy Six Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Eighty seven and paise seventy one only) with pendente-lite interest @ 10.40olo p.a from 24,02.2022 till the date of realization. The claim against defendant no.1 is dissolved as per orders in Hon'ble NCLT.

¶46

The Applicant ba ntitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties ule to OA towards rea lization of the debt *

¶47

JUr'l 2025

¶48

(oA.No.t2/20221

¶49

The order of attachment in IA.No.47g/2022 dated 20.05.2022 in respect of Petition schedule property "A & B" is made absolute. Include the said property in the Recovery Certificate.

¶50

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person

¶51

and properties of defendants No.2 to 6towards realization of the debt

¶52

due.

¶53

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

¶54

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

¶55

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶56

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶57

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th lune, 2025)

sd/-

(c. GoPtcHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

d%<br>;20;unzuzs :
t& .., - 5i
%r#

¶62

O<lt2-TR-uE/coPY
o#fri,ffEo.

State Bank of India v. M/S. Kumar Aquatech Agencies Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Kumar Aquatech Agencies Private Limited

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

State Bank of India versus M/S. Precise Design and Engineering

State Bank of India versus Mr. Chintal Somashekar Reddy

State Bank of India versus M/S.Veda Infrastructure

Canara Bank versus M/S. Phalanx Life Sciences

Canara Bank versus Sri. Thurpati Prakash Mutyamraj

State Bank of India versus M/S. Nandamuri Transporters Private Limited