Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Sharny Tours and Travels

DRT25 Sept 2023OA/1002/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Debt Recovery Tribunal OA filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank against three respondents for the recovery of Rs. 33,72,058.59 with interest and costs, finding the defendants jointly and severally liable and entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.33,72,058.59 with future interest at 9.50% p.a.; OA claim secured by hypothecation of vehicles; applicant entitled to proceed against persons and properties for realizati

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Sharny Tours and Travels — DRT (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF^{SEPTEMBER,2023}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR^{KoTHE,B.Com.,L LB. (Hons.), M A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application No: l0O2^OF 2022

¶4

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Having its office at # 6-3-ltO9/l/Pl3O2, 3'o Floor, Jewel Pavani^Towers, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory. .....Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

M/s. Sharny Tours & Travels, Rep. by its lvlanaging Partner Mr. G Suresh, Oftice at # 7-L92lA, Plot No. 582, Mulgi Shivareddygudda, Ghatkesar Village & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District-501301.

¶7

lv1r. G. Suresh S/o. Yadagiri, Aged: 33 Years, Occ: Managing Partner of M/s. Sharny Tours & Travels R/o. H. No. 11-30, Ambedkar Nagar, Ghatkesar Village & lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District-501301.

¶8

Mr. G. Harish, S/o. Yadgiri, Aged: 33 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No. 11-30, Ambedkar Nagar, Ghatkesar Village & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District-501301. ...Defendants

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant

¶10

lvl r. M. Srinivas Reddy

Defenda nts

Expa rtery*

o4.NO.1002/2022

:: ORDER::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a totat sum of Rs.33,72,058.59ps f the defendants iointly and

¶16

severally with future interes t 18% p'a' from the date of

¶17

application till the date o,."t with costs and in

¶18

deraurr ror sare o, oo nro",n".1ll'ot;:ril:

¶19

Paper publication filed on D1, Summons served on D2 and 3. They were set exparte on 1g.( 15 2023 as called absent and no

¶20

representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined P's, Legar Associate,

¶22

as Aw-1 and marked 14 oo.rrool'tnu' nents through her as Ex. A.1 to

¶23

Ex. A.14.

¶24

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

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the On uguinst the Defendants and OA hypothicated vehicles?

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.14 marked on behalf of the Appticant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants.

¶28

Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶29

6/ry:*tt

¶30

oA.NO.1002/2022

¶31

In the result,^{the present OriginalApplicationNo 1002/2022is} allowed as under:^-

¶32

i) The Defendants^{are jointly and severally} liable to^{pay to the AppllcantBanka sum of} Rs.33,72,058.59ps^{with future interest @} 9.50o/o simple^{from the date of applicationtill} the date of realization;

¶33

ii) the OA claim^{issecured bY way of} hypothecation of^{vehicles described in the} schedule annexed to^{the OA and the} applicant bank^{is entitled to proceed against} the same realise^{its debt;}

¶34

iii) the applicant^{bank is also entitledto proceed} against the^{person and propertiesof} defendants for^{realization of its dues;}

¶35

iii) the applicant^{bank is entitled for the costs'}

¶36

The Applicant Bank^{is directedto file Cost Memowithin 2 weeks} from the date^{of receipt of this Order'}

¶37

Issue Recovery^{Certifi cate accordingly'}

¶38

Communicate^{a copy of this orderto the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno, Eorrected,^{signed and pronounced by mein the open courton} this the 25$^{day of SePtember, 2023).}

¶39

G0' )r9

¶40

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Sharny Tours and Travels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Sharny Tours and Travels

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

Canara Bank versus Babu Teron

Adesh So Gajanan Meshram versus Edelweiss Housing Finance Ltd.

Shabnam Khatun versus Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank)

State Bank of India versus M/S Aggarwal Chemical Industries

Icici Bank Limited versus Naina

Icici Bank Limited versus Manoj Mahadev Angre