Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Sai Krishna Enterprises.

DRT27 Jan 2026OA/351/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed SBI's Original Application No. 351/2024 for recovery of approximately Rs. 2.92 crore principal plus interest and costs from respondent-defendants regarding cash credit, home loans, and other dues, dismissing their defenses as ex-parte and noting secured mortgage properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 2,92,77,831.93 with future interest and costs; permission to proceed against mortgaged properties.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Sai Krishna Enterprises. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

,,,'.,,,i O'RtrGtr NAt APPI_LGATI @N, No:",3.5 1,,O F .2024

¶6

State Bank of India., Stressed Assets Recovery Branch(SARB) D.No.54-20-1Bl3F/U6, 3'd Floor, Upstairs of KFC Surya Prakash Square Gurunanak Nagar Road NTR District, Vijayawada - 520008. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Sai Krishna Enterprises., Represented by its Prop; Smt, Kuna Anitha, R/o. Door No.10-13-133 Groupd Floor, Tirupathi District.

¶10

Smt. Kuna Anitha Wife & Legal Heir of Deceased Borrower Late S. Suresh Kumar, Aged Major R/o. Flat No.203, 2nd Floor, Akhil Apartments Nehuru Nagar, Tirupathi, Tirupathi District.

¶11

Sri. Somisetty Suresh Kumar (Deceased) Represented by his Legal Heirs Smt.Somisetty Nanda Devi(Mother) Smt. Kuna Anitha (Wife), Miss. Somisetty Sudhiksha, All R/o.Flat No.203, 2nd Floor Akhil Apartments, Nehuru Nagar, Tirupathi District.

¶12

Smt.6. Nanda Devi Mother & Legal Heir of Deceased Borrower Late S.Suresh Kumar, R/o.Flat No.203, 2nd Floor Akhil Apartments, Nehuru Nagar, Tirupathi District.

¶13

Miss. S. Sudiksha Daughter (Minor) of Deceased Borrower Late S. Suresh Kumar, Represented by her Mother Smt. Kuna Anitha, R/o. Flat No.203 -.).,r*.. --- ,

..1. ,. '^!.'

oA.NO.351/2024

2nd Floor, Akhil^{Apartments,Nehuru} Nagar, Tirupathi,^{Tirupathi District'}

¶18

...Defendants

¶19

Counsel^{for the APPlicant} Defendants

: Mr. K. Sundeep

: Ex-parte

::^qLLLL::

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs.2,92,77,831.93ps^{i.e., a sum of Rs'2,25,13,467 '27ps} towards Cash Credit^{Loan A/c. No.40097650005with future} interest @22.257o^{p.a., a sum of Rs.12,98,936'4tipstowards} Home Loan A/c.^{No.37730602321with future interest @9 75olo} p.a., a sum of Rs.52,34,050.87ps^{towards Home Top-UpLoan} A/c. No.39489200958 with^{future [email protected]/o p a and a} sum of Rs.2,37,377.37ps towards^SBISuraksha A/c. No.37843055083 with^{future interest @8,90o/op afrom} the defendants^{jointly and severallywith monthly rests from} the date of application^{till the date of realizationalong with} costs and ln default^{for saleof OA scheduleproperties.}

¶24

WS not filed by D7, 2,4^{& 5 hence,their right of filingWS was} forfeited on 09.09.2025,^{whereasDE not filed by D1, 2, 4 & 5} hence, their right of filing^{DE was forfeited and were set ex-} parte on 05.01.2026 as called absent and no^{representation.} Applicant counsel stated that^{D2, 4 & 5 are the LRs of deceased} D3.

¶25

The Applicant Bank examined^{K. Sudhakar, Legal Manager, as} AW-1 and marked 28 documents^{through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex.} A.28. N.\\1\

¶26

oA.NO.351/2024

¶27

¶28

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

¶29

The^point that arises^{for consideration is:-}

¶30

Whether the Applicant^{Bank is entitled} for the claim made in the^{OA against} the Defendants and OA^schedule properties?

¶31

As stated supra, the^{Defendants 7, 2, 4 &' 5 (sth Defendant} being minor represented^{by her mother i.e., znddefendant)} remained ex-parte. The^{EvidenceAffidavitcoupled with the} recitals in the documents^{viz., Exs. A.1 to A'28 marked on} behalf of the^{Applicant Bank clinchesthe claim of the Applicant} Bank against the^{Defendants. Hence,I hold that the Defendants} 1 & 2^jointly and^{severally and the defendants 2, 4 & 5 (5th} Defendant being^{minor representedby her motheri e ,2nd} defendant) to^{the extent of estate of deceasedD3, now lying in} their hands; are^{liableto pay the OA claimto the ApplicantBank} with future interest^{and costs.}

¶32

In the result, the^{present Original ApplicationNo 35U2024is} allowgd as under:^-

¶33

i) The Defendants 1 &^{2 jointlyand severally} and the defendants^{2,4 & 5 (5th Defendant} being minor^{representedby her mother i e',} 2nd defendant)^{to the extent of estateof} deceased D3, now^{lying in their hands;are} llable to^{pay to the AppllcantBank a total} sum of^{Rs.2,92,77,831'93psi e^- a sum of} u%*

¶34

¶35

oA.NO.3s1/2024

¶36

Rs.2,25,13,467.2lps towards Cash Credit Loan A/c.No.40097650005, a sum of Rs.12,98,936.48ps towards Home Loan A/c. No.37730 6OZ32L, a sum of Rs.52,34,050.g7ps towards Home Top_Up Loan A/c.No.39489200958 and a sum of Rs.2,31,377.37ps towards SBI Suraksha A/c.No.37843055083; with future interest @9.15olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶37

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bahk is entiued to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶38

iii) the appricant bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendants 1 & 2 for realization of its dues;

¶39

iv) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶40

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks . from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶41

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶42

Communicate a coDV of this order to the parties concerned. this the (Dictated 27'h Day to the steno,.ori".t"d, of January, 2026). signed and *_rr.Ir"iiie rn the open court on

¶43

H**$ HWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/s. Sai Krishna Enterprises.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Sai Krishna Enterprises.

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

Indian Bank versus M/s. Camon Frames.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. S RTraders.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Kakalwar Suresh

Bank of Baroda versus Veeramasu Jayamma

Bank of Baroda versus Doddi Prathap

Bank of Baroda versus Doddi Prathap