Allowed

Canara Bank v. L N Constructions

DRT12 Jul 2023OA/15/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal-II allowed the bank's original application for recovery. Finding the defendants absent, the court held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed loan amount with future interest and costs, and confirmed the bank's right to proceed against secured and unsecured assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants held jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 8,72,38,417/- with future interest and costs; bank entitled to realise dues from OA schedule properties and defendant's assets.

Canara Bank versus L N Constructions — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF ]ULY, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

oA. NO. L5 0F 2022

¶4

Canara Bank, MID Corprate Branch, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Representated by its Assistant General Manager and GPA Holder.

¶5

Versus

¶6

,..Applicant

¶7

M/s. LN Constructions Represented by its Managing partner Flat No.107, Karan Residency, Green View Lane, Bowenpally, Secunderabad - 500009.

¶8

Shri S.Vinay Kumar Reddy S/o. Sri Narayana Reddy Aged: Major, Occ: Business Flat No. 107, Karan Residency Green View Lane, Bowenpally, Secunderabad - 500009.

¶9

Shri K.R.Sudershan Reddy S/o. Sri K.R.Govinda Reddy Aged:Major, Occ: Business AF-3, Stone Valley Apartments Road No.4, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034.

¶10

ShriP. Satyajith Reddy S/o.Sri Rami Reddy Aged: Major, Occ: Business Flat No. 81, Green View Apartments l-/ C"w'p ?'

¶11

¶12

lournalist^{ColonY,lubilee Hills} Hyderabad-500033^'

¶13

Shri^{P. SurenderRao} S/o.Sri^KishanRao is;i i,?ili 3'T;^{fi ::l?f; i'} " n ". iiooinouo,^{Nizamabad-oo2'}

¶14

Smt^{K.R.Subhashini} . . W/o. Sri^VenkataReddy Aoed:Major,^{Occ: Business} HlNto.3-s-a:s,^HYderguda' HYderabad -^500029'

¶15

Shri S.Venkata^{Rami Reddy} s/o. Sri^{NarayanaReddY} Aoed:^{Major, Occ: Business}

¶16

ir'"t rlo.ioz,^{Srinivas APartment} HasamtPet,BowenPallY' Secunderabad'

¶17

Smt P.lYothi^Reddy W/o.^{Sri SatyajithReddy} Aoed: Maior,^{Occ: Business} irii rlo.rir, cr""n^{view Apartments} iouinatist^{tolonY, JubileeHills} Hyderabad-500033 '

¶18

..Defendant/s

¶19

Counsel for^{the APPlicant} Defendants

¶20

: Mr. Dishit^{Bhattacharjee} : Exparte

¶21

:: ORDER^::

¶22

the^{presentOA for the recoveryof a total}

¶23

1. The^{APPlicantBank filed} sum of^{Rs. a,723a'4il-} i.e., Rs.5,87,11,746l-^{under SoDloan facility'} ,AV,A

¶24

(-/'o'

¶25

Rs. 2,04,69,781/- under WCTL loan facility, Rs. 34,46,657l- under FITL loan facility and Rs.46,10,2331- under Covid FITL loan facility from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @13.92olo,13.75o/o,t3.75o/o and 13.92olo^per annum respectively compounded monthly from the date of Application till the date of realisation along with costs, and in default, for sale of OA schedule assets.

¶26

The defendants 1 & 2 were served summons through paper publication. The defendants 3 to B were served summons. All the defendants were set exparte on 18.08.2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶27

The Applicant Bank examined M.Satish Kumar, Manager, as AW-1 and marked 250 documents through him as Ex. A-1 to Ex. 4-250

¶28

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

¶29

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶30

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiiled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and the OA schedule properties?

¶31

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-pafte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A 250 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants jointly and severally are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs,/\Wp (-/ 'r>'

¶32

In the^{resurt, the present originar Apprication No.t5l2o22 is allowed} as under:^-

¶33

i)^{The Defendantsjointlyand severally are liable to pay to} the^{Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs' 8'72'38'4171- i'e} Rs.5,87,11,746l-^{underSODloan facility'Rs' 2'04'69'78U-} under^{WCTL loan facility' Rs' 34'46'657/- under FITL loan} facility^{and Rs'46'10'233/- under Covid FITL loanfacility} with future^{interest@12olo p'a' simplefrom the date of} application^{till the date of realization;}

¶34

ii) The^{OA claim is secured by way of mortgage/} hypothecation^{ofproperties as described in the} schedules^{annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is} entitled^{to proceed againstthe same to realiseits debq}

¶35

iii) The^{applicantbank is also entitled to proceed against} the^{person and properties of the defendants for} realization^{of its dues;}

¶36

iv) The^{applicant bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶37

Memo^{within 2 weeks}

¶38

B. The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file Cost} from^{the date of receipt of this Order'}

¶39

Issue^{RecoveryCertificate accordingly'}

¶40

Communicate^{a copy of this order-to--the parties concerned'} rt"no.,^{tL'nscribedbyhim, corrected,signedand pronounced by mein the}

¶41

rDictated to tt " L-0"^ ."rn "" tttis the^{12th day of July' 2023)'} ad^Ye

¶42

ad^Ye

¶43

rpk(esnwnR^KorHE) pnestotttc oFFICER

Canara Bank v. L N Constructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. L N 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

Similar cases

Ms Tara Maa Enterprise versus Bank of Baroda

Idbi Bank versus Mr. Chand Ansari and Others

Idbi Bank versus M/s Md. Rushi Kamal and others

Bishnu Priya Panda versus Ujjivan Small Finance Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus M/s Mahfuz Construction and Others

Hdfc Bank versus M/s Jaiswal Enterprises and Others