Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Gujja Srinivas

DRT8 Jan 2026OA/163/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of a loan. The applicant claimed Rs. 33,29,590 plus interest against two respondents. Defendant 1 forfeited the right to file a written statement due to default, while Defendant 2 was set ex parte. The tribunal accepted the bank's documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 33,29,590 with future interest as detailed in the order; issuance of Recovery Certificate; costs awarded to applicant.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Gujja Srinivas — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE^{DEBTSREGOVERYTRIBUNAL- I AT HYDERABAD} DATED^{THIS THE 8th DAY OF JANUARY'2026} PRESENT:^{SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND' PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶2

OA. No.163^{OF 2025}

¶3

Between^:

¶4

State Bank^{of lndia,} Stressed^{Asset Recovery Branch,} 2nd Floor, TSRTC^{Commuter AmenitY Centre,} Bus Terminal^ComPlex' Koti, HYderabad -^{500 095'}

¶5

Represented^{bY its Chief Manager}

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr. Gujja^Srinivas, 1-4-248,PHCColonY'

¶9

KamareddY,^Armoor, Nizamabad,

¶10

Telangana -^{503 111.}

¶11

Also At -

¶12

Junior Account^Officer' Northern^{PowerDistribution Company of T} Limited, H.No.2-5-3112,^{Corporate Office,} i'' , VidyutBhavan, r4y * Nakkalagutta,^Hanamkonda, Warangal,^Telangana -^{506 001. li,*} 0 A^. ---" i :il .l .,:: :l .:,.U: ,. ',:lr\v

¶13

(oA. No. 163/202s)

¶14

Chairman and Managing Director, Northern Power Distribution Company^{of Telangana StateLimited,} H.No. 2-5-3112, Corporate Office, VidyutBhavan, Nakkalagutta, Hanamkonda, Warangal, Telangana - 506 001 Defendants

¶15

Counsel forthe^parties:
ForTheApplicant	C. Sreedhar
FortheDefendant No.1	P.VijayKumar
FortheDefendantNo.2	Exparte
Reservedon	06.01.2026
Pronouncedon	08.01.2026
Uploadinwebsiteon	08.01.2026

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.33,29,590.00 Ps. (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Only) i.e a sum of -

¶18

(i) Rs.22,38,435.00 Ps. (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Thirty
Eight Thouqand Four Hundred and Thifi Five Only)
together with future interest @ 13.00% p.a with monthly rests
from thg_late of this application till the date of realization.
i, ]
,"; .,
2
,/
.1
,.,/

¶19

(OA. No. 153/202s)

¶20

(ii) Rs.10,91,155.00 Ps. (Rupees Ten Lakhs Ninety One Thousand One Hundred and Fifty Five Only)^{together with} future interest @ 14.05 %^p.a with monthly rests^{from the date of} this application till the date of realization.

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant No. 1 availed^personal loan under^{Xpress Credit} Elite Scheme term loan of Rs.24,65,400/- and executed Personal Loan Agreement daled 12.07.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank. Defendant No. 1 availed^personal loan under Xpress Credit Elite Scheme term loan of Rs.10,34,000/- and executed Personal Loan Agreement dated 14.08.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 24.09.2024 and issued Legal notice dated 26.03.2025 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶22

., Vijay Kumar filed Vakalat on behalf of Defendant No. 1. Even'hfter the lapse of 45 Days WS of Defendant No.1 not filed and hilncb the right of filing of WS of Defendant No. 1 was _!,: t., 00 forfEited.on.26.09.2025. Defendant No. 2 called absent and set exparte bnI8.06.2025.

¶23

(OA. No. 163/202s)

¶24

Sri. P. Prabhakar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to 4.12.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶26

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶27

Defendant no. 1 did not file his WS even after availing sufficient time and hence the right of filing of WS of Defendant No. 1 was forfeited. Defendant No. 2 called absent and set 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.A.1 to 4.12. ln 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 to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest

¶28

(oA. No. 163/2025)

¶29

ln the^{result,the presentOA is allowed with costs' as under:}

¶30

The Defendant^{No' 1 isliable to pay to the Applicant Banka} total sum^{ofRs'33,29,590'00 Ps'(RupeesThirty Three} Lakhs^{Twenty Nine Thousand Five Hundredand Ninety} OnlY)^{i.e a sum of} -

¶31

(i) Rs.22,38,435.00^{Ps together with future interest@ 13'00%} p.a from the^{date of this applicationtill the date of realization'}

¶32

together^{with future interest@} (ii) Rs.l0,91,155'00^Ps' this aPPlication^{till the date of} 14.05% P.a^{from the date of} realization.

¶33

The APPlicant^{Bank isentitled} to^{proceed againstthe Person} towards^{realization of the debt}

¶34

and^{proPerties of defendantNo'1} due.

¶35

10.^{That Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA'}

¶36

11.^{The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the} '=i:Sa!e of receiPt^{of order'}

¶37

'-t,.,. r-ir ,i \ ,,t,tfl)R *Il-4 t\ * ll . lt -^'''!

¶38

(oA. No. 153/2025)

¶39

lssue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly.}

¶40

Communicate^{a copy of the order to the partiesconcerned'}

¶41

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed^{by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 8h day^{of Jan, 2026)}

¶42

,6@'.65,
1''6 f# '%'
',
i .F sd/-
€)
LI
n^ (G. GOPICHAND)
t. il
PRESIDING OFFICER
ffi^jW*
111! r:Y!"" "a.

State Bank of India v. Mr. Gujja Srinivas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Gujja Srinivas

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. Our Basket

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Raja Rajeshwara Tent House

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sri. Venkateshwara Traders

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Briztron Softech Private Limited

Canara Bank versus Sri. Maalagown Anjaneyulu

State Bank of India versus Sri Durga Automotives