Allowed

Canara Bank v. Om Sai Enterprises

DRT9 Dec 2022OA/97/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debt Recovery Tribunal judgment, the Presiding Officer allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank seeking recovery of a debt of approximately Rs. 82.50 lakh from an ex-parte defendant. The court held the defendant liable to pay the principal sum with future interest and costs based on the submitted evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay applicant bank Rs.82,50,483.61 plus future interest; claim secured by hypothecation; recovery certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus Om Sai Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 9-rH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

¶2

PRESENT: SH, RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.COM, L.LB. (HONS,), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

oA. NO. 97 0F 2022

¶4

lY/s. Canara Bank Balanagar Bra nch JK Complex, 1st Floor Main Road, Ba la naga r H yd era bad - 5 0 0 0 3 7 Rep. by its GPA Holder.

¶5

....Applicant

¶6

Versus Om Sai Enterprises Rep. by its Mr. Adluri Raja S/o A. Narasimha Aged about 51 years Occ: Business, D Flat No.101 Sridevi Apartment Dwarakapu ri Colony Punjagutta, Hyderabad-500082. ...Defendant Counsel for the Applicant Ms. Sa ngeeta la iswa l. Defenda nts Ex-parte

¶7

:: Q-B!-E-B_::

¶8

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.82,50,483.61Ps from the Defendant with interest @9.90o/o plus 2olo Penal Interest p.a. with monthly rests from 25.01.2022 along with costs, and in default, for sale of OA schedule assets. /)1*r-.,^ w-

¶9

A/ "'^# '-

¶10

oa.9712022

¶11

The defendant served summons through paper publicatlon. Defendant was set exparte on 27.7o.2o22 as it was ca lled absent and no representation.

¶12

The Appllcant Bank examined T. Gaikwad, lvlanager as^{AW-1 and} marked 12, documents through him as Ex. A.1to Ex. A.12.

¶13

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and^perused the material placed on record.

¶14

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶15

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA schedule assets as Prayed^For?

¶16

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶17

In the result, the^present Original Application No-97/2022 is allowed as under:^-

¶18

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.82,50,483.61Ps with future interests @ 9.900/o date of realization;p.a. simple from the fu"-date of application till the

¶19

¶20

oA.9712022

¶21

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule to OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its dues;

¶22

iii) the applicant bank is also entifled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendant for realization of its dues;

¶23

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶24

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order,

¶25

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶26

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 9th day of December, 2022) .

¶27

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶28

Canara Bank v. Om Sai Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Om Sai Enterprises

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

Shri Ashish So Arun Kumarwar versus Yavatmal Urban Co-Operative Bank

State Bank of India versus Gautam Kumar and Others

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Sidhi Vinayak Vision and Others

K G Bhingradiya Vidayalay and Ors. versus Varthana Finance Private Limited

Rajesh Prasad Singh versus Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Suraka Educational Society