Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Max Dental Innovations

DRT27 Jan 2026OA/462/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a loan dispute. The bank proved its claim via unchallenged evidence and account statements, while defendants failed to produce evidence or cross-examine the bank's witness, resulting in a decree for principal sum and interest for both entities.

What did the court decide?

Decree for joint and several liability to pay total sum of Rs.1,06,43,282/- with future interest @ 12.90% p.a. from date of application till realization; permission to proceed against properties for r

State Bank of India versus M/S. Max Dental Innovations — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 27rH DAy OF JANUARY, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESTDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.452 ol 2fJ24

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch -II, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. Telangana. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Max Dental Innovations, Represented by its Proprietor, Mr. K. Venkata Sai Shanmukh, Regd office: Plot no.B6, 1't floor, Above Out look dental hospital, RTC colony, Thirumalgiri, Secunderabad Hydrabad - 15.

¶9

Also at: H.No 1-19-80/122A, Plot no.l22, Vijay-.eLl^{pi i,'-Jpra,} Hydera bad Telangana - 500 062.

¶10

Sri K. Venkata Sai Shanmukh, L6-2-836/C/5, Madhav nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad - 500 059.

¶11

Defenda nts

¶12

Counsel for the Parties:

¶13

For the Apptrcantthe ApptrcantApptrcant For the Defendantsthe DefendantsDefendants

¶14

For the Apptrcantthe ApptrcantApptrcant Sri A.M. Kiran Kumar For the Defendantsthe DefendantsDefendants Sri A. Hari Krishna Reserved on 20.01.2026 Pronounced r-rn ''ft'1'--$:=, 27.07.2026 ,":,.-^.i;_r.; ., I 8.01.2C26 Uptoadcd in wensttgibn ,',iti ,, ti.l-.g 2 V ,tuil 7[l2fi^* Y hr.

¶15

loA.No.a62/202a].

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,O6,43,282/- (Rupees One Crore Six Lakhs Forty Three thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Two only) i.e., (Rs.8,23,166/- + Rs.95,18,1931- + Rs.3,O1,923/-) with future interest @ 12.90o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 represented by its proprietor defendant no.2 availed cash credit limit of Rs.30 lakhs and term loan of Rs.90 lakhs on 10.L2.202O. Defendant no.2 as individual capacity holder executed guarantee agreement. The defendants restructured ihe terms and conditions and executed supplemental agreement of loan cum hypothecation. Ii is submitted by the Applicant bank that the Defendants have availed the said loan facilities and failed to keep up the repayment schedule, as such the account was classified as NPA on 29.O2.2O24 and issued demand notice dated L8.03.2O24. Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendants have not regularized the account, and the defendants did not come forward to repay the same.

¶19

of Applicant against defendants is of One Crore Six Lakhs Forty Three and Eighty Two only) i.e., 2 7 ilu ?rys 2 $'srqry

¶20

loA.No.462/2024)

¶21

(Rs.8,23,166/- + Rs.95,18,L93/- + Rs.3,O1,923l-) with future interest @ 12.90% p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization. Hence the OA.

¶22

The Defendants No.1 to 3 filed written statement and denied the averments made in OA. It is contended that the Applicant bank obtained signatures of defendants on blank printed formats. It is further contended that the applicant bank charged high rate of interest and classified the account as NPA without following the guidelines of RBI. It is further submitted that the defendants paid a substantial sum of Rs.63 lakhs inspite of which the Applicant bank did not file any part satisfaction memo before this Tribunal. Hence prayed for dismissal of oA.

¶23

The Applicant Bank in support of its claim, filed evidence affidavit duly sworn in by Sri S. Pradeep Dakey, Chief lYanager of Bank as AW.1 and through him marked 12 documents as Ex.A.1 to A.12. As against this, the defendants did not choose to adduce any evidence on their behalf in support of their contentions and also did not choose to cross examine the AW.l to controvert has Chief Evidence. In spite of repeated adjournments, the defendants failed to file evidence right of filing Defendant Evidence Affidavit was

¶24

i.^{2 I uN ?tt)i j} W'*s#

¶25

(OA.No.462/2024)

¶26

I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶27

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶28

i) Whether the Applicant Bank has proved its claim as made in OA

¶29

against the defendants ?

¶30

ii) To what relief ?

¶31

Point No.i):

¶32

As per the documents filed by the Applicant Bank and also as per the admissions made by the defendants in the Written statement, it is very clear that the defendants have availed loan from the Applicant Bank, but failed to repay the amount. Allthe amounts paid by the defendants are clearly mentioned in the statement of account filed by Applicant Bank. The deFendants have not placed any material documents to show their bonafides for establishing that the Applicant bank failed to follow the RBI guidelines as per the norms.

¶33

AW.1 is not cross examined by the counsel for defendants. The defendants have not come forward to give evidence to substantiate that their liability is less than the amount mentioned in the OA Under such circumstances, the evidence of AW.1 coupled with recitals Ex.A. l to A.12 stood unchallenged and unrebutted. The Applicant bank clearly established that the defendants are liable to pay

Applicant bank.

27.tii:?:rS ,

loA.No.a62/2o2al

Point No.ii)

In the result, the present Original application is allowed with costs as under:

¶39

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1ro6143,2821- (Rupees One Crore Six Lakhs

¶40

Forty Three thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Two only) i.e., (Rs.8,23,L661- + RS.95,L8,L931- + Rs.3,OLt923l-) with future interest @ 12.90o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶41

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

¶42