Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Laxmi-E-Mobility

DRT5 Jan 2026OA/2/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application by the State Bank of India for recovery of loan dues totaling Rs.1,37,58,141/- plus future interest and costs from three defendants who remained ex-parte. The court held them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants to pay Rs.1,37,58,141/- with future interest and costs; Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated assets and properties.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Laxmi-E-Mobility — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE O5TH DAY OF ]ANUARY, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAN4ESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A.

¶4

PRESIDING OFFiCER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 02 OF 2025

¶6

State Bank of India., SME Branch, 2nd Floor, Krishna Complex Gayathri Estates, Kurnool. Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Laxmi- E-Mobility., A Partnership Firm, Rep by its Padners, the Defendants 2 and 3 Flat No.102, Sandhya Block, Medha Rejoice Apartment/ Ambience Fort Road, Radha Krishna Nagar, Attapur Hyderabad - 500048.

¶10

Also at:-

¶11

H. No.12-6- 19/3/5, Beside NKNR Garden Pillar No.848, Vivek Nagar, Kukatpally Hyderabad - 500072.

¶12

Sri. P. Yashwanth Reddy, S/o.sri P. Uma Maheshwara Reddy, Aged about 38 Years Male, Occ: Business, Partner of 1st Defendant Firm, Door No.7-36, Parumanchala Main Road, Parumanchala, Kurnool - 518001.

¶13

Also at:-

¶14

Flat No.211, Surya Towers, Elock A Challa Compound, Kurnool - 518002.

¶15

Sri.P.Uma Maheshwara Reddy S/o. Sri. P. Shiva Sha nkar Reddy Aged about 71 Years, Male, Occ: Business Partner of 1st Defendant Firm, Door No.7-36, Parumanchala Main Road, Parumanchala, Kurnool - 518001. ,.n*^,, // ./" -/4.,)S (:/'c''

oA.NO.02/202s

Also at:-

Flat No.211, Surya Towers, Block A Challa Compound, Kurnool - 518002.

¶20

... Defendants

¶21

Counsel for the Applicant

¶22

: Mr. G. Prabhakar Sarma

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.1,37,58,t4L/- i.e ,, a sum of Rs.1,05,47 ,69tltowards Cash Credit Loan A/c.No.4t3263L3464 with^future interest @13.45olo p.a. and a sum of Rs.32,10,4601-^towards Term Loan A/c.No.41326266728 with future interest @10.650/o 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^{hypothecated assets'}

¶27

Summons sent to D1 returned with endorsement^unclaimed hence, deemed to be served and was set ex-parte^on 14.07.2025 as called absent and no representation.^Summons served on D2 & 3 through^{paper publication. They were set ex-} parte on 16.09.2025 as called absent and no representatlon.

¶28

The Applicant Bank examined K.Sudhakar,^{Legal Manager, as} AW-1 and marked 14 documents through^{him as Ex. A.1 to Ex'}

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant^{Bank. Perused the} material placed on record.

¶30

The point that arises for consideration^ist- /m$\

¶31

oA.NO.02/2025

¶32

¶33

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assets?

¶34

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.14 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶35

In the result, the present Original Application No,0212025 is allowed as under: -

¶36

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1,37 ,5a,l4l/- i.e., a sum of Rs.1,05,47,681/- towards Cash Credit Loan A/c. No.41326313464 and a sLim of Rs.32,10,460/- towards Term Loan A/c. No. 47326266728; with future interest @12.80o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶37

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 entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debti /VV ' ' ,u"'<'*u

¶38

oA.NO.02/202s

¶39

¶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 appllcant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶42

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost l4emo^{within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶43

lssue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶44

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 tnrs the 05⁵ Day of Janudry,^70261.

¶45

(RAN4ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/S. Laxmi-E-Mobility

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Laxmi-E-Mobility

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

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Igenix Pharma Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of Baroda versus Avula Ayyaswamy

M/S. Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Mr. M. Varada Reddy

Uco Bank versus M/S. Addas Agri Bio Tech Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Optrobox

Udayagiri Eswaramma versus Karur Vysya Bank