Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S. Manila Shanthi Filling Station

DRT13 Mar 2026OA/90/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed OA filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 29,37,021.48 against a proprietary firm and its proprietor, holding the bank established its claim and relegating relief including attachment of mortgaged/hypothecated property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 29,37,021.48 plus interest; proceeding against mortgaged property, hypothecated movables, and defendants' properties allowed; Recovery certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus M/S. Manila Shanthi… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRTBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 13rH DAy oF MARCH, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.9O of 2026

¶4

Between:

¶5

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 2nd floor, TSRTC commuter Rmenity Centre, Bus Terminal complex, Koti, Hyderabad - 5OO O9S. Represented by its Authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Manila Shanthi Fiiling Station, Represented by its proprietor, Smt Pulimeti^pooja, 5y.no.622, NH-65,

¶9

Hyderabad - Vijayawada Highway Chityal, Nalgonda, TS - 500 114,

¶10

Also at

¶11

R/o t6-2-7st/A/82, Karanbagh, Saidabad colony, Saidabad, Hyderabad - 500 059.

¶12

Pulimeti^pooja, C/o Pulimeti Sri Hari, Aged about 37 years, occ: business, Femate, R/ o t6-2-7St/ A/82, Karanbagh, Saidabad colony, Saidabad, Hyderabad - 500 059. Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the^partiedr For the Applicant t Tarangini^pisipati ,gflrR296 * hr

¶14

(oA.e0/2026)

¶15

Reservedon	: L2.03.2026
Pronounced on	: 73.03.2026
Uploadedin websiteon	: 17.03.2026

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.29,37,O21.4gps (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousand Twenty One and paise Forty Eight only) with interest @ tO.70o/o p.a with monthly rests 23.12.2025 tiil the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property and hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant no.1 is a sole proprietary firm represented by its proprietor/ defendant no.2 avaired roan of Rs.30.00 rakhs against hypothecation of movables and created mortgage of schedure property in favour of Applicant bank. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms. of sanction, hence the appricant bank crassified the account as NpA on r4.0s.2025 and issued recail notice dated os.t2.2o,{u#^trN I requests and demands, the defendants did nottdEr the o$tandinS ence this OA.

¶19

o"r" n aailt, .J,,30 H."ffiU" exparte on t2.03.2026.

¶20

{oA.9o/2026l.

¶21

smt Kalyani Rathod, Manager of the Appricant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.7.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶24

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.7. In 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 entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶25

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointry and severaily riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.29,37,O2l.4gps (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousand Twenty One and paise Forty Eight

¶26

only) with i p.a 23.12.2025 tiil the date of
realization 16,
., i 1X
IrtAff ?06
fo.,N r.i, = / Fffi,!
-\ii-i'rgy

¶27

(oA.e0/2026)

¶28

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property and hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realisation of the debt due.

¶29

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶30

The Applicant Bank is entiUed to the costs of the oA.

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶33

L4. communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶34

(Dictated to the P.A', transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day of March, 2026)

¶35

sdl-

¶36

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶37

.,fru-
A 1a nAR ?u6 :lI
W*q#,

¶38

otrT-l l;W" t-tv-r -.c !!'tf

¶39

State Bank of India v. M/S. Manila Shanthi Filling Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S. Manila Shanthi 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

State Bank of India versus Mr. Juluri Sai Krishna

Hdfc Bank versus M/S. Sree Distributors

Canara Bank versus M/S. Indian Rice Depot

Canara Bank versus M/S. Next Plan Overseas Educational Consultancy

Canara Bank versus M/S. Narmada Powerloom Industry

State Bank of India versus Seliveri Suresh Babu