Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Sri Jalaram Jute and Polymers

DRT6 Apr 2026OA/4/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the OA filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 22.63 Crores against a partnership firm and its guarantors (defendants) who failed to repay sanctioned credits. Reliance was placed on documents exhibited by the bank chief manager as defendant sides remained absent.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 22,63,93,360/- with interest @11.40% p.a. from 27.09.2025. Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated movables, mortgaged properties, and properties of defendants No. 2 to 6.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Jalaram Jute and Polymers — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 6rH DAY OF APRTL, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.4 ot 2026

¶5

Between:

¶6

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Branch-Il, D.No.3-4-1013/A, first floor, CAC, TSRTC Bus Station,

¶7

Kacheguda, Hyderabad - 500 027,

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s. Sri Jalaram Jute and Polymers, A partnership firm represented by its Partners Unit regd address: Sy.No.738A, 739AA, 739A, 739E Palda village, Janepally road, Nizamabad, TS - 503 002.

¶11

Mr, Bharath Kumar Thakkar, s/o Chandrakanth Thakkar, aged major, male, 6-12-7 ll t, Namdevwada, Nizamabad - 503 001.

¶12

Also at:

¶13

H.No.6-2-157122, Subhash nagar Nizamabad - 503 002,

¶14

Also at:

¶15

Flat no.110, block-A, Ashoka Avenue, Near Baswa Garden, Vinayak nagar, Nizamabad -503 001.

¶16

[6tpRmln

¶17

Mr. Hasmukh Thakker, S/o Chandrakanth Thakker,

¶18

(oA.No.a/2026)

¶19

Aged major, male, H.No.6-12-71, Namdevwada, Nizamabad - 503 001.

¶20

Smt Mrudulaben Chandrakanth Thakkar, w/o Chandrakanth Thakkar, aged major, female, H.No.6-12-71, Namdevwada, Nizamabad - 503 001.

¶21

Also at:

¶22

H.No.6-2-157l22, Subhash nagar Nizamabad - 503 002.

¶23

Sri Chandrakanth Laxmidas Thakkar, s/o Laxmidas, aged major, male, H.No.6-2-157122, Subhash nagar Nizamabad - 503 002.

¶24

Sri Bhavesh Thakkar, S/o Chandrakanth Thakker, Aged major, male, H.No.6-2-157122, Subhash nagar Nizamabad - 503 002.

¶25

Also at:

¶26

Mr. Bhavesh Thakker, s/o Chandrakanth Thakker, aged major, male, flat no.807, 8th floor, west wing block-C of Shwetha Aryan, bearing D.No.2-092lB /C-807 , pipeline road, Jeedimetla, Quthbullapur^mandal, Medchal, Malkajgiri dist- 500 055.

¶27

Also at:

¶28

Flat no.110, Block A, Ashoka Avenue, Near Baswa garden Vinayak nagar, Nizamabad - 503 110.

¶29

(oA.No.4/2026)

¶30

Counsel for the^parties: For the Applicant Sri Alluri Krishnam Raju For the Defendants Exparte Reserved on 30.03.2026 Pronounced on 06.04.2026 Uploaded in website on 06.04.2026

¶31

ORDER

¶32

The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.22,63,93,3601_ (Rupees Twenty Two Crores Sixty Three Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty only) with interest @ 11.40olo p.a with monthly rests from 27.09.202s till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movabres and mortgaged properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶33

As per the averments in the application, the Appricant Bank states that defendant no.1 is a partnership firm represented by its partnery defendants 2 and 3 avaired credit rimits of Rs.g47 rakhs and rater enhanced to Rs.139O lakhs. The defendants No.2 to 6 stood as guarantors and executed guarantee agreements and deposited the title deeds of perties. tre OefenOants executed letter of cum all the in the

¶34

(oA.No.4/2025)

¶35

schedule to OA in favour of Applicant bank and executed all necessary documents. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 11.05.2025 and issued legal notice dated 10.09.2025. Inspite ofseveral requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶36

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 30.03.2026.

¶37

Sri S. Arun Kumar, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.134.

¶38

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶39

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?

¶40

Defendants remained 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,Al to A,134, In view of the above, I hold that tfrr rnt Bank has established their claim made in the OA and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to the OA with future interest and costs.

¶41

(oA.No.a/2026)

¶42

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.22,63,93,3601- (Rupees Twenty Two Crores Sixty Three Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty only) with interest @ 11.40olo p.a from 27.09.2025 till the date of realization.

¶43

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables and mortgaged properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶44

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 6 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶45

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

¶46

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶47

Issue Recovery certiflcate accordingly.

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶49

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 6s day of April,2026)

¶50

sdl_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/S. Sri Jalaram Jute and Polymers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Sri Jalaram Jute and Polymers

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 Mr. Mareedu Ajay

Mr Anwar Basha Shaik and another versus Gic Housing Finance Ltd.

Sandeboina Jayamma and Ors. versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Siddi Vinayak Poly Fibers

Hdfc Bank versus Mr. Saikumar Palem

Canara Bank versus M/S. Kisan Agri Shop