Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smt. Vempati Sudha Rani

DRT9 Jul 2026OA/258/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of approximately Rs. 6.53 Crores along with interest and costs, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 6,53,13,760.00 with future interest @10.15% p.a.; proceedings against mortgaged properties and other properties allowed; recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Vempati Sudha Rani — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL _ IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE Ogth DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRt cUMMADI cOptCHAND, PREStDtNG OFFICER

¶3

OA. No. 2SB OF 2026

¶4

Between :

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd Floor, TSRTC CommuterAmenity Centre, Bus Terminal Complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095 Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Smt. Vempati Sudha Rani, Wo. Venkataramana, Aged: 71 Years, Female, H.No. 15-11-327, VDO,s Cotony, Khammam -SO7 OO2. Telangana Mobile: 9949796629.

¶9

Sri Vampati Venkataramana, S/o. Venkataramana, Aged:7'l Years, Male, H.No. 15-11-327, VDO's Colony, Khammam -507 002 Telangana Mobile; 9949796629.

¶10

(OA. No. 2s8l2026)

¶11

SriVempatiVijay, S/o. Venkataramana, Aged: 45^years, Male, H.No. 15-11-327, VDO,s Colony, Khammam-507 002. Telangana Mobile: 9949796629.

¶12

Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the parties : For The Appticant C. Prabhakar For the Defendants Exparte Reserved on 07.07.2026 Pronounced on 09.07.2026 Upload in website on 09.07.2026

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.6,53,13,760.00. ps. (Rupees six Grores Fifty Three Lakhs Thirteen Thousand seven Hundred and sixty onry) with future rate of interest @10.15%^p.a with- ry'glfly rests from the date of fiting of this application ization and in default for sale of

¶16

Mortga in the Schedule of Property toO ll^g .luL mm

¶17

(OA. No. 2s8l2026)

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendants no. 1 to 3 availed Term Loan facility of Rs.600.00 Lakhs with interest and executed necessary loan documents such as Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation dated 20.05.2024 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants no. 2 and 3 joinfly stood as a guarantor and executed Guarantee Agreement dated 20.05.2 024 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants created Equitable Mortgage morefully mentioned in schedure of property r to ilr to oA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of rifle Deeds dated 21.0s.2024 in favor of the Appricant Bank and deposited Sare deeds in favor of the Applicant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank crassified the account as NpA and issued Legal Notice dated 09.03.2026 to the defendants. tnspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendants called absent and set exparte on Ol.07.2026.

¶20

Sri. K. Govind Raju, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as

¶21

*+,u"ei 6 5. CourGBl for th nt Bank. I I JUL 2[2t :

¶22

(oA. No. 2ssl2026)

¶23

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

¶24

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Appticant Bank, AW.1 , official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to 4.26. 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 entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶25

8' ln the resurt, the present oA is ailowed with costs, as under :

¶26

The Defendants no. 1 to 3 are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.6,53,13,760.00. ps. (Rupees Six Crores Fifty Three Lakhs Thirteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Only) with future rate of interest @10J5%^p.a from the date of firing of this apprication ti, the date of realization.

¶27

The Appticant Bank is entitled to proceed against the Mortggaed Properties in the Schedule of property I to lll to the OA the debt due.

¶28

(oA. No. 2ssl202G)

¶29

The Applicant Bank is entifled to proceed against the person

¶30

and properties of Defendants no. 1 to 3 towards realization of

¶31

the debt due.

¶32

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

¶33

The Appricant sha, fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶34

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned. ,,_iffl?l#".ii;l jl",,H:r by her, corrected, sisned and pronounced by me in the open court on

¶36

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶37

¶38

State Bank of India v. Smt. Vempati Sudha Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smt. Vempati Sudha Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus M/S. Vijaya Textiles

Canara Bank versus M/S. Venkatamahalaxmi Powerloom Industry

M/s Jay Ess Associate versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Swarooparani Parakala

State Bank of India versus M/S. Royal Industries

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Mr. Pandu Ranga Reddy