Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/S. Buidia Constructions

DRT8 Sept 2023OA/126/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Indian Bank for recovery of Rs.29.31 lakhs against M/s. Buildia Constructions and Mr. P. Subrahmanyam. The court held that the bank established its claim and granted liability for principal, interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.29,31,165.36 with interest; Applicant Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated movables and other properties for realization.

Indian Bank versus M/S. Buidia Constructions — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

OA.No.126 of 2023

Between:

Indian Bank,

New N a lla ku nta bra nch, 2-2- L t3O -24 / 1/A/ 1, Sh iva m Road, Prashanth nagar, New N a lla ku nta, Hyderabad - 500 044.

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1, M/s. Buildia Constructions, Represented by its proprietdr, Mr. P. Subrahmanyam, Office at flat no.503, cK heights, Phase 13, KPHB road, KpHB Colony, Survey no.7B/P, Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

¶10

Sri P. Su brahmanyam, s/o Late P. Radhakrishna, aged about 54 years, occ: business, R/o flat no.503, GK heights, Phase 13, KPHB road, KPHB Colony, Survey no.7B/P, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Defendants Counsel For the ridhar Reddy For the

¶11

(oA. No.12612023)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.29r31,165.36ps (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs thirty one thousand One hundred Sixty five and paise thirty six only) i.e.,

¶14

a) A sum of Rs.24,72,500.06ps under Overdraft account together with subsequent interest @ 9.45olo p.a (plus 2olo penal) with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶15

b) A sum of Rs.87,208.90ps under covid loan account together with subsequent interest @ 8.75olo p.a (plus 2olo penal) with monthly rests from date of applicauon till the date of realization;

¶16

c) A sum of Rs.2,22,202.91ps under GECLS account together with subsequent interest @ 9.25olo p.a (plus 2olo penal) with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶17

d) A sum of Rs.40,312.75ps under FITL account together with subsequent interest @ 13.50o/o p.a (plus 2olo penal) with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶18

e) A sum of Rs.1,08,940.74ps under FITL account together with subsequent interest @ 9.25olo -qa-:6pJy. 2olo penal) with monthly re sts f ro m d a te of u p p(.gt' o n'' ti (ti S,'8af:, ,o'1. rea I i zati o n ; tl"t-i ulr',. . i.._

¶19

¶20

?^{OS SEP ?W} :I. 2

¶21

(OA. No.125l2023)

¶22

and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶23

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 avaired overdraft rimit of Rs.1o.oo rakhs for the purpose of construction. The defendants executed demand promissory note, agreement of hypothecation of movables and agreement for open cash credit. Defendants 1 & 2 again availed covid emergency loan for a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh and executed demand promissory note and agreement of hypothecation of movables. The defendants again availed FITL limit of Rs.2.00 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 05.06.2020 and executed demand promissory note, term roan agreement. The defendants again avaired open cash credit with a limit of Rs.20.00 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 21.01,2021. subsequently the defendants availed FITL limit of Rs.42,473/- and term roan of Rs.1.00 rakh and executed necessary documents. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants faired to comply the terms oF sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the accoqnt as NpA and issued recall notice =-::-^{'i Erfr.:} dared 03.11.2020 and rnspite or severar :q,qryi"$q1Y&i\ 'iil 3 i.r, r .t 0 srP 208 3 '-i\ i -r-lruv;i*I., . '. i']r-.^.r '<;'J ';:-'v?.i+ L 2, ';l:.--._t-.:--

¶24

(OA.No.126/2023)

¶25

requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA,

¶26

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 24.07.2023.

¶27

Shri K. Shankarachari, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.29.

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶29

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?

¶30

The defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.29. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA agans.t the Defendants and hence the -..^{--;r -{.*} Applicant Bank is entiuedff@futfa;O made in the oA with future interest and costs. ij' C:i rA t}<sup>.i ro sFP)w :, -.-.. 4 -., : ,.,.:. . 't , .' '].. -' ': ''''-.i. r':,. --. . . .^J', ! -;. i .----;::.!"

¶31

(OA.No.12612023)

¶32

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶33

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.29,31,165.36ps (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs thirty one thousand One hundred Sixty five and paise thirty six only) i.e.,

¶34

a) A sum of Rs.24,72,500.06ps under Overdraft account together with subsequent interest @ 9.45% p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶35

b) A sum of Rs.87,20B,90ps under covid loan account together with subsequent interest @ 8.75% p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶36

c) A sum of Rs.2,22,202.91ps under GECLS account together with subsequent interest @ 9.25olo p.a from date of application till the date of rea lization;

¶37

d) A sum of Rs.40,312.75ps under FITL account together with subsequent interest @ 13.50o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶38

e) A sum of Rs.1,08,940.74ps under FITL account together with
subsequent interest @ 9.Z5Vq,p-Afrom date of application till
the date of realization; ..::tf ;t iir<br>':'," '..,', '+:i..
.-
..i,,, ,g,,
!.
..,,'{ 11 - I StP 20r Q.':'..'a,i
,.,,,.1rr .,,.r.ir*:::#.
-L?y3p.,1", ---.-----.-5'-';1t'

¶39

(oA.No.12ol2023)

¶40

i) the Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated movabres as described in the schedure to oA towards rearization of the debt due.

¶41

ii) the Appricant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendants no.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

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

¶43

iv) The Appricant shail fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶46

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribec corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 8th day " ,"r1,%!3i,

¶47

sd/-

¶48

u nrG},
lv qA '$.'
, loSEP2m I,(r
i= , ^ Idii
>,***,**B-7'
r\i(.i')65n4 -s+::7{Fju'-,.

¶49

Assf.^Fogis(rar ofr']"-,"^f-ly0EFIB"q

¶50

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Bank v. M/S. Buidia Constructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/S. Buidia Constructions

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ms Santosh Trading company versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Ganesh Ginning Factory

Ms Chelpuru Brothers Cloth Sotres versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)

Union Bank of India versus Sri Hari Kishan Achhpaliya

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Nikhil Clothing

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Purple Advertising