Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt T. Lavanya

DRT13 Dec 2022OA/63/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Banking Company's Original Application seeking recovery of an outstanding term loan of Rs. 27,56,947.41 with interest against the borrower and guarantor, directing sale of mortgaged and hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Entitlement to recover Rs. 27,56,947.41 with interest; right to proceed against hypothecated movables and mortgaged properties; entitlement to costs.

Canara Bank versus Smt T. Lavanya — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13rH DAy OF DECEMBERT 2022

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.63 ol2022

¶4

Between:

¶5

Canara Bank, Kazipet branch, 1 - l-904, Siddarthnagar Kazipet, Warangal - SO6 OO+. Represented by authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Smt T. Lavanya, w/o T. Ramesh (Borrower)

¶9

aged 35 yrsocc: business, H.No. 1-7- 1000/4, Advocates Colony, Hanamkonda,

¶10

Warangal - 506 001.

¶11

Sri Muppu Ravi, s/o Sri Mallaiah (guarantor) aged 40 yrs, occ: business, R/o Narsimhulagudem village, Warangal, TS - 506 104.

¶12

Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Parties:

¶14

For the Applicant Dr. Shaik Fa
., $:
For the Defendants
Exparte w
@ '*
ORDER ot, 7$11

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against

¶16

recovery of a total sum of Rs.27,56,947.41ps (Ru

¶17

(oA.No.63/2022)

¶18

Seven lakhs Fifty six thousand Eight hundred forty seven and paise forty one only) with interest @ 11.15% p.a from 02.06.202L till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated and mortgaged property as described in the schedure to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendants availed term loan limit of Rs.20.00 lakhs for establishing the manufacturing of bricks unit on 10.06.2016. Defendant no.1/ mortgagor submitted various roan documents/ agreements and undertakings. To secure the said loan, the defendant no.1 executed letter handing over tiUe deeds of properties as detailed in the schedure to oA on 03.06.2016. Defendant no.1 also executed composite hypothecation agreement hypothecating the entire stock of finished bricks and raw materiar on 06.06.2016. Defendant no.2 being guarantor executed guarantee agreement for due repayment of said loan. After availing the loan facility, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on 29'03.2017 and issued demand notice on 2r.og.2ol7 and possession notice dated 07.0s.2019. Inspite of severar requests and.denmnds. the defendants did not crear the ourstanding. n"n.",n,.-'#S,i#r:t'"t' ,

¶20

l,^,.' ?i 1^.; ilr,[ &fl 3. Defendants were called absent set exparte on 29.09.2O22. I '1 ' .i'^' ... ' ;'-41" '."i..'.ii.-j1:';"'':'''

¶21

(oA.No.63/2022)

¶22

Shri Satyam Babu, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as

¶23

Ex.A.1to A. 16.

¶24

Heard the Ld, Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶25

6 The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶26

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as

¶27

prayed for?

¶28

7' The defendants were cared absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiat of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.Al to 4.16. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the OA with future interest and costs,

In the result, the present OA is allowed with .o.,r, .rffi)"., +-". ..w"'-rD L$^tn* .rh^ ^^' -r- ' ' ii' 1l^0EBM ^;l' l 'b[e,

¶33

The Defendants No.1 & 2 are joinfly and severally f ia Bg go_ ,u, ,o ..,.,rs,;:fl fh6 the Appricant A ^hri^--! Bank Fr--, a totar sum of Rs.27,56,tor.orat$,ffi;[L{13}...i' Twenty Seven takhs Fifty six thousand Eight trunarea ffi

¶34

¶35

(oA.No.53/2022)

¶36

seven and^paase forty one only) with interest @ 11.15%^p.a

¶37

from 02.06.2021 till realization.

¶38

i) The Applicant Bank is entitled to^proceed against^the hypothecated movables and mortgaged^property as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶39

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

¶40

iii) The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶41

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

¶42

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶43

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶44

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day olDec.,2022)

¶45

sdl-
ty * (G. COPTCHAND)
.* 13 tl PRESIDING OFFICER
$ha
r RUE COPY
4
Wx{,9 .i:;."yyli;{^f 9,0%( ' "^, )

Canara Bank v. Smt T. Lavanya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt T. Lavanya

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 Overseas Bank versus Ms Srinivasa Associates

Canara Bank versus Ms Renuka Poultry Farms and Feeds

Kiran Enterprises and Ors. versus Equitas Small Finance Bank Limited

Ummer K C versus State Bank of India

Central Bank of India versus M/s Automatrix Private Limited

Kundan Kumar versus Bank of Baroda