Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/s. Eswar Filling Station.

DRT13 Mar 2026OA/622/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues. As respondents appeared ex-parte, the court held them jointly liable to pay the principal, interest, and costs, and validated the security interest over mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Respondents ordered to pay Rs.1,23,20,732/- with future interest and costs; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged properties and respondents.

State Bank of India versus M/s. Eswar Filling Station. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

]N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAIT4ESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A.

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 622 OF 2024

¶6

State Bank of India., Chilamathur Branch, Chilamathur Satya Sai District. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Eswar Filling Station., Rep by its Proprietor the Defendant 2 Herein Kodikonda Check Post NH-7

¶10

Chilamathur Mandal, Satya Sai District - 515601.

¶11

Sri. D. N. Papanna, S/o.Sri. Kumarappa Aged about 55 Years, Male, Occ: Business Proprietor of 1st Defendant, Kodikonda Check Post NH-7, Chilamathur Mandal Satya Sai District - 515601.

¶12

Also at:-

¶13

D.No.4-436, Main Road, Gorantla Satya Sai District - 515231.

¶14

Smt. D. N. Triveni, S/o.Sri. D. N. Papanna Aged about 46 Years, Occ: Business Female, D.No.4-436, Main Road, Gorantla satya sai District - 515231.

¶15

Sri. D. N. Ashwarthappa S/o. Sri. Kumarappa, Aged about 66 Years Male, Occ: Business, D.No.4-436, Main Road Gorantla, Satya Sai District - 515231.

¶16

... Defendants

¶17

: Mr. G. Prabhakar Sarma Counsel for the Applicant

¶18

Defendants : Ex-oarte OY*u

oa.No.62212024

:: O-.rLLLL ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.1,23,2O,732/- i.e., a sum of Rs.1,03,85,768/towards Cash Credit Loan A/c.No.34767923173 with interest @l2o/o^p.a., a sum of Rs.13,01,025/- towards^GECLLoan A/c. No.39454607419 with interest @9.25olo p.a. and a sum of Rs.6,33,939/- towards FITL Loan A/c. No.39605476510 with interest @15olo p.a. from the defendants jointly and severally with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule properties.

¶23

Summons served on D1 to 4 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 28.03.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶24

The Applicant Bank examined Lambu Amaranandha Babu, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 34 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.34.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. Perused the material placed on record.

¶26

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶27

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

¶28

6, As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.34 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank

¶29

firy,>'u

¶30

oA.NO.522l2024

¶31

¶32

clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶33

In the result, the present Original Application No.622/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶34

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1/23,20,732/- i.e., a sum of Rs.1,03,85,768/- towards Cash Credit Loan A/c.No.347 67923L73, a sum of Rs.13,01,025/- towards GECL Loan A/c.No .39454607 419 and a sum of Rs.6,33,939/- towards FITL Loan A/c. No.39605476510; with future lnterest @10.300/o^p.a. simple from the date of appllcatlon till the date of realization;

¶35

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

¶36

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the person and^propertles of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶37

iv) the applicant 6"nkr,.n t rw:.::rr,

¶38

0A.NO.62212024

¶39

¶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 accord ing ly.

¶42

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th Day of March, 2026).

¶43

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. M/s. Eswar Filling Station.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/s. Eswar Filling Station.

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Shilpa Electrical Infra Tech India Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Pusala Lakshmamma

Bank of Baroda versus Mr. Pidathala Ashok Kumar

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Jmj Fleet Services

Axis Bank versus Chandra Mohan

Canara Bank versus Sri. Nittoori Srinivas