Allowed

Yes Bank Limited v. Mr.Domalapally Dass

DRT30 Oct 2023OA/1004/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Yes Bank Limited's Original Application against two defendants for recovery of a loan sum of Rs.24,43,500.19 with interest and costs, upholding the bank's claim of joint and several liability.

What did the court decide?

Directing the defendants to pay Rs. 24,43,500.19 plus future interest at 9.25% p.a. simple, secured by hypothecated vehicle, with issuance of recovery certificate.

Yes Bank Limited versus Mr.Domalapally Dass — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE^{DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED^{THIS THE 3oth DAY oF ogroBER',2023}

¶2

PRESENT: SH^{MMESHWARKOTHE' B Com'' L LB' (Hons')'M A'} PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶3

Original^{AppllcationNo:LoO4 OF 2022}

¶4

Yes Bank^Limited, office at #^{1-8-387,3'o Floor,} Aoravanshi Plaza,^{HUDA Lane,} s]P. noad,^{Secunderabad-500003'} .....Applicant. Rep. by^{lts Authorized Signatory'}

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mr. DomalaPallY^Dass, S/o. D Narslmha

¶7

a.red: 49 Years, Occ:^Business, nio. n.^{ruo. +-+1+11-,t't'unaganoor Village'} Havath Naqar,^{Sanghi Nagar,} Ranga^{neddY, HYderabad-50151 1'} 2. Mr. DomalaPallY^Shekar, S/o. D Jangaiah, Aoed: 34 Years,^{Occ: Business,} pio. n. r',ro. 1-70, Munaganoor^Village, HaYath^{Nagar, Sanghi Nagar,} Ranga Reddy,^{Hyderabad-50151 1'}

¶8

.,. Defendants

¶9

Counsel^{for the APPlicant}

¶10

: Mr. M. Srinivas^Reddy

Defendants

'ex'arte lr4(i'.o

oA,NO.1m4/2022

:: ORDER::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA For the recovery a total sum of Rs.24,43,500.19ps from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @ 18o/o p.a. compounded with monthly rests from 15.09.2022 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶17

Summons served on D1 & 2. The defendants were set exparte on 10.03.2023 as called absent and no representation. The Applicant Bank examined D. Shyam Kumar Reddy, Asst. Vice President, as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.12.

¶18

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is;-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendants 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 Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs' /^t''"'t""t1'\1'-

¶22

oA.NO,1@4/2022

¶23

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.1004/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.24,43,500.19ps with future interest @ 9.25o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

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

¶30

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

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 3oh day of oclober, 2023) .

¶32

¶33

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Yes Bank Limited v. Mr.Domalapally Dass

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Limited v. Mr.Domalapally Dass

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

Lucy Sebastian versus PNB Housing Finance Ltd.

Ms Maa fly Ash Bricks Industries versus Punjab National Bank

Shail Bala Chaudhary and Shailwala Chaudhari versus Canara Bank

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sachleen Singh

Indian Overseas Bank versus Balvir Singh

Ms Gyankund Trust to Educate and to Serve Kurukshetra versus Ms Religare Finvest Ltd.