Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Mohammad Hameed

DRT20 Jan 2026OA/445/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this OA, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the State Bank of India's claim for recovery of Rs. 23,11,202.00 from Mr. Mohammad Hameed. The Defendant appeared ex parte. The court held the bank established its claim and granted the relief with future interest and a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 23,11,202.00 with interest @ 13% p.a., costs of the OA, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Mohammad Hameed — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

!N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF JANUARY,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADT cOpICHAND, PREStDtNG OFFICER

¶3

OA. No. 445 OF 2025

¶4

Between: State Bank of lndia, SARB - ll, Chikkadapaily, Hyderabad Represented by Chief Manager Applicant VERSUS Mr. Mohammad Hameed S/o. Mr. MD Saleem, Aged 37 years R/o. H.No. 1-4-751, Flat No. G-3, Camus Capital Apartment, Musheerabad, Hyderabad - 500 020 Defendant Counsel for the parties : For The Appticant Mr. A.M. Kiran Kumar For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 19.01.2026 Pronounced on 20.01.2026 20.01.2026 2 0 li.il tpt

Applicant

(oA. No. 44sl202s)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.23,11,202.00 ps. (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eleven Thousand Two Hundred and Two Only) with future interest @ 13.00% p.a with monthty rests from the date of this application till the date of realization.

¶9

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the Defendant availed personal loan under Xpress credit loan of Rs.25.00 Lakhs repayable in 72 monthly installments with interest @11.00% p.a with monthly rests and executed Personal Loan Agreement dated 2g.02.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the

¶10

defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA on 07.05.2025 and issued Legar Notice dated 09.0g.2025 to the defendant. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶11

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 19.01 .2026.

¶12

Manager of the Applicant Bank and exhibited relevant documents, marked as I to A.8. 20IAN2W * .+

¶13

(oA. No. 4451202s)

¶14

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶15

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

¶16

Defendant 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.g. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶17

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

¶18

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.23,11,202.00 ps. (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eleven Thousand Two Hundred and Two Only) with future interest @ 13.00% p.a from the date of this application til the date of realization

¶19

¶20

entitled to proceed against the person and towards realization of the debt due.

¶21

¶22

(oA. No. 44sl2o2sl

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶26

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶27

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th day of Jan, 2026)

¶28

sd/-

¶29

(c. GoPtcHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Mr. Mohammad Hameed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Mohammad Hameed

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

State Bank of India versus Basa Technologies Private Limited

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Akkishetty Sreelatha

p srinivasulu versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Gaddam Saritheshwar Rao versus Karur Vysya Bank

State Bank of India versus Mr. Ramana . M

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Chaduvula Thirupathamma