Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Naarsimharaju Enterprises and 5 Others

DRT8 Sept 2026OA/215/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an appeal filed by State Bank of India for recovery of ₹77 Lakhs and future interest. The Tribunal held that the bank established its claim and granted a recovery certificate, making defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed; defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 77,01,283.00 with future interest Rs. 11.15% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Naarsimharaju Enterprises and… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE OTth DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

OA. No. 215 OF 2026

¶3

Between :

¶4

State Bank of lndia, MSME Mancherial Branch, D.no 10-89 to 92, Ground floor, Opposite Mun icipal Office, Mancherial Town, Adilabad District- 504208 Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. Naarsimharaju Enterprises 2. A Partnership Firm, Rep: by its Managing Partner,

¶8

Smt. Mahesh Aruna Devi, H.No. 4-5-212lC/9, AP Colony, NTPC, Jyothinagar, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District - 505215.

¶9

Mr. Bhimavarapu Koteshwara Rao, S/o Mr. B. Uppalaiah, Aged: Major, Occ: Managing Partner of D-1 R/o H.No.20-1-27312, Bus Stand Colony, Godavarikhani, Ramagundam Mandal, Peddapalli District - 505206.

¶10

OBSEP
J

¶11

(OA. No.21sl2026)

¶12

Smt. Mahesh Aruna Devi, Wo Mr. Dontha Venkateshwarlu Aged: Major, Occ: Partner of D-1 R/o H.No. 1-7112, Lokapet, Muppirathota Yelidaid Mandal, Peddapalli District - 505525,

¶13

Mr. Parsa Srinivas S/o Mr. Parsa Rathnaiah, Aged: Major, Occ: Partner of D-1 R/o H.No.2-1 7 12, Parupalli, Karimnagar-505153.

¶14

Mr. Gandam Rayamallu S/o Mr. G. Narsaiah, Aged: Major, Occ: Partner of D-1 R/o H.No.4-5-2121C19, Annapurna Colony, NTPC, Ramagundam, Karimnagar District - 505215

¶15

Mr. Donta Venkateshwarlu, S/o D. Narsaiah,

¶16

Aged: Major, Occ: Business R/o GD 185, Ganga Colony, Ramakrishnapur, Mandamarri, Godavarikhani Mandal, Kyathnapally, Peddapalli District - 504301

¶17

OBSIP Defendants

¶18

(oA. No.21sl2026)

¶19

Counsel for the parties :

¶20

For The Applicant V. Raghu For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 02.09.2026 Pronounced on 07.09.2026 Upload in website on 08.09.2026

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against^{Defendants for} recovery of a total sum of Rs.77,01,283.00. Ps^{(Rupees Seventy} Seven Lakhs One Thousand Two Hundred and^EightyThree Only) with future rate of interest @11.15%^{p.a with monthly rests} from 26.03.2026 till the date of realization and in default^for sale of Mortgaged Property and Hypothecated Movables^as mentioned in the Schedule of Property^{A and} B^{to OA.}

¶23

As per the averments in the application,^{the Applicant Bank states} that Defendant No.1 is a Partnership^{firm represented by its partners} Defendant No. 2 to 5 availed cash credit^{loan facilityof} @11.15Yo^{p.a with monthly rest and} cum Hypothecation dated the Bank. The Defendant no. 6 [$sEP2m

¶24

(oA. No.21sl2026)

¶25

stood as a Guarantor in the loan facilities availed by the Defendants and executed Guarantee Agreement dated 28.06.2022 in favor of the Applicant Bank The Defendants created Equitable Mortgage morefully mentioned in Schedule of property to OA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 25.06.2022 and deposited Original Title Deed in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants renewed the loan facilities from time to time and executed necessary loan documents 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 and issued Legal Notice dated 15.12.2025 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶26

Sri. B. Raju filed Vakalat on behalf of Defendants No. 1, 3 and 6. Even after the lapse of 45 Days WS of Defendants No. 1, 3 and 6 not filed and hence the right of filing of WS of Defendants No. 1 , 3 and 6 was forfeited on 02.09.2026. Defendants No. 2, 4 and 5 called absent and set exparte on 15.07.2026.

¶27

:t .. ._ , -
4. .-''.-.$Ji...:Srtftaqffiurra, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined
;;; iW ,JX$Nr"d exhibited retevant documents, which are
.: mar(Jo as Ex.R{h A.ts.
,-a ': 0 B SrP 2m ".if-'
:,'1 !''j
5. :1,, AHearo tne i"Sleiijinset for the Appticant Bank.
,'"'.,:l;,o
. '.,'i" '

¶28

¶29

(OA. No. 21sl2026)

¶30

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?

¶31

¶32

Defendants no. 1, 3 and 6 did not file their WS even after availing sufficient time and hence the right of filing of WS of Defendants No.^'l , 3 and 6 was forfeited. Defendants No. 2, 4 and 5 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.A.1 to A.15. 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 entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶33

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under^:

¶34

The Defendants No. 1 to 6 are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.77,01 ,283.00. Ps (Rupees Seventy Seven Lakhs One Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Three Only) with future rate of^interest @11.15Yo p.a from 26.03.2026 till the date of realization

¶35

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the Mortgaged Movables as mentioned in the Property and schedule of Pro$erty to the OA towards realization of -.1! the debt due. ' 08sEP2tr6 '. ,; .'^! )"'.'! -- - ?J. .'^j. -r:i . .: .t.r!-li)1-.. ,., r)., '' -''--.,..,' i';i'' '': ---..-:-4

¶36

(oA. No. 21sl2026)

¶37

The Applicant Bank is entitled to^{proceed againstthe person and} properties of Defendants No. 2 to 6 and^properties of Defendant no. 1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Communicate a copy of the order to the^parties concerned.

¶42

(Dictated to the P.A., transcnbed by her, corrected, signed and^pronounced by me in the open court on this the 07th day of Sep , 2026)

¶43

sd/-
(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER

¶44

TRUE GOPY
:-Tf^DtttY
ffi,f:"*".#,

State Bank of India v. M/S. Naarsimharaju Enterprises and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Naarsimharaju Enterprises and 5 Others

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

Hdfc Bank versus Ritish Rao Regulapati

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Srinivasulu Reddy

Mrs Uma Vani Indukuri versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mohd.Manzoor Ahmed

State Bank of India versus Khaja Ladies Tailors and Cloth Center

Hdfc Bank versus Baljeguden Mohan