Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Dynamic Electronics

DRT24 Apr 2026OA/1079/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte application filed by SBI SME Branch for recovery of over Rs. 1 crore from M/s. Dynamic Electronics and Mrs. Shahnaaz Akbari. The court held defendants liable for the principal, future interest, and costs, and authorized sale of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 1,09,64,973/- with 11.40% p.a. interest; Applicant entitled to proceed against hypothecated assets and defendants' properties; costs awarded.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Dynamic Electronics — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

"oR[91y6tr,,

¶2

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD .^{DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY} OF APRIL, 2026

¶4

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 1079 oF 2025

¶6

STATE BANK OF INDIA, SME Branch, Narsapur "X" Road, Balanagar, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Chief Manager

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Dynamic Electronics Represented by its^proprietor Mrs. Shahnaaz Akbari,

¶10

W / o. Mohammed Rasheeduddin, Office at Plot No. 4, Ratna Co-operative Society, Hanuman Temple, Sikh Village, Tarbund, Secunderabad-500009

¶11

Mrs. Shahnaaz Akbari, W/o. Mr. Mohammed Rasheeduddin Occ: Business, No. L-7-574/25/F/3, Zamistan pu r, M usheerabad, Hyderabad-500020

¶12

Hyderabad-500020 .... Defendants 4 rc.J.Rqq^nrt,',1\ Counsel for the Applicant W Defendants : Ex-parte :: ORDER ::

¶13

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. t,09,64,9731- from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @ll.40o/o p.a. from the date of (-7flrrryt**

¶14

oA.NO.1079l}AZs

¶15

application till^{the date of realizationalong with costs and in} default for^{sale of hypothecated assets'}

¶16

SummonsservedonDefendantsl&2throughpaper publication. They were^{set exparte on 23.04.2026as called} absent and^{no representation.}

¶17

The Applicant^{Bank examined Mr. Deva Peter Paul, Assistant} Manager, as^{AW-1and marked 15 documents through him as} Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.15'

¶18

Heard Ex-parte^{argumentsfrom the Learnedcounsel of the} Applicant Bank.^{Perused the materialplaced on record'}

¶19

¶20

The^point that^{arises for considerationis:-}

¶21

Whether the^{Applicant Bank is entitled} for the ctaim made^{in the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hypothecated} assetsT

¶22

As stated supra, the^{Defendants remainedex-parte. The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupled with the recitals in the documents} viz., Exs. A.1 to^{A.15 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank} clinches the claim^{of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that^{the Defendantsare jointly and severally liable} to pay the OA claim^{to the Applicant Bank with future interest} and costs

¶23

In the result, the^{preseqlrOriginal Application No.L079/2A25is} arrowed as under,^- U(W*

¶24

.^. o

¶25

oA.NO.10791202s

¶26

i) The Defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. L,09,64,973/- with future interest @11.40olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

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

¶28

iii) the appricant bank is arso entiiled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶29

iv) the appricant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶33

(Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 24tn Day of April, 2026).

¶34

/ds5"s'r ldet(rsr-rwAR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/s. Dynamic Electronics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Dynamic Electronics

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

Indian Bank versus Mr. Shaik Ameer Bhasha

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Aaradhana Kanagala

M N Anjaiah versus Union Bank of India

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Karthik Enterprises

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Inumula Jagannadham

Union Bank of India versus Sri Rama Retail Outlet