Allowed

Bank of India v. Shashi Pet Industries

DRT1 Aug 2023OA/153/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application by Bank of India against M/s. Shashi Pet Industries and Smt Shashi Agarwal for recovery of dues aggregating nearly Rs. 98.79 lakhs arising from cash credit and term loans, holding the applicant established its claim. The Tribunal declared the defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

The defendants declared jointly and severally liable to pay total dues of Rs.98,79,323.35 with future interest and costs; entitlement to proceed against movable properties and persons of defendants co

Bank of India versus Shashi Pet Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST'2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.153 ot 2022

¶5

Between :

¶6

Bank of India, Basheerbagh branch, H. No.3-5-822 and 3-5-822/8,

¶7

Ground f loor, Bashirbagh to King Koti Main road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad -500 029. Represented by lts Chief Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s. Shashi Pet Industries, (Borrower) Represented by its Proprietor Mr. Shashi Agarwal, B-12-540, TNGO's colony, Kattedan, Malladevpally, Rajendranagar Municipality, Rangareddy distict, Telangana -5OO 077.

¶11

Second add ress:

¶12

Plot No.1B, Sy.No.87,^' Part B, Co-operative Housing Society, Gagan Pahad village, GHMC Rajendra Nagar Municipality, Hyderabad - 500 052.

¶13

.,J""''wtt,.'B.
o rnil,oa :)
",

¶14

Smt Shashi Agarwal, W/o Omprakash Agarwal, Aged about 60 years,

¶15

(OA. No.153/202 2 )

¶16

L4-12-4t2,4th floor, Basanthi nivas, Razzakpura, Goshamahal, Begum Bazar, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500 012. Proprietor of M/s. Shashi Pet Industries

¶17

Second address:

¶18

9 -4-84/ L45, Kakatiya nagar, High School, Golconda, Hydera bad.

¶19

Third address:

¶20

5-3-1008, Vishnu Plywood, Kesari building, Shamberbagh, Osmangunj, Nizamshahi road, Hyderabad - 500 012.

¶21

Fourth address:

¶22

5-B-85/4, F.No.402, Gadwall compound, Nampally, Hyderabad, TS - 500 020.

¶23

Fifth address:

¶24

Flat no.150BA, Aditya Impress Towers, before passport office, Shaikpet, Hyderabad - 500 008.

¶25

Sixth add ress:

¶26

B-205, Nandanam Apts, Nampally station road, Hyderabad, TS -500 001.

¶27

Defendants

¶28

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

(oA.No.1s312022)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.98,79323.35ps (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakhs Seventy Nine thousand Three hundred twenty three and paise thirty five only) i.e.,

¶34

a) A sum of Rs.58,22,357.23ps in respect of cash credit with further interest @ 9.35o/op.a with monthly rests plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest from the date of application till realization;

¶35

b) A sum of Rs.30,31,108.47ps in respect of term loan-I with further interest @ 9.35o/op.a with monthly rests plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest from the date of application till realization;

¶36

c) A sum of Rs.7,!4,L22.65ps in respect of term loan-II with further interest @ 2.85%p.a with monthly rests plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest from the date of application till realization;

¶37

d) A sum of Rs.3,11,735l- in respect of term loan-III with further

¶38

interest @ 2.85o/op.a with monthly rests plus 2o/o p,a as penal interest from the date of application till realization;

¶39

and in default for sale of movable properties as described in the schedule to OA.

¶40

As per the averments in the applicatipn; the.Applicant Bank states that .^{-. .} .:^'t.,i}</sup>

¶41

the defendant No.1 firm reorasentea-bv its'fu\etor defendant no.2 tir ,-'i lr. ,.,

¶42

availed cash credit for €-.t6um_of R9.53.0Q lakB$nd term loan for a ,. -1 l- i ,lit,l im _ li ii6 5 ,{ /ir t,i %tu &ol,,t.',.*W

¶43

(OA.No.1s3/2022)

¶44

sum of Rs.45.00 lakhs on 11.05.2018. The defendants executed promissory note, bearer letter, hypothecation cum loan agreement, letter of declaration, comprehensive agreement, MCLR agreement, UCC agreement, letter of declaration undertaking dated 15.05.2018. The defendants hypothecated the stocks, books, plant and machinery as primary security to the Applicant bank on 11.05.2018. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 30.06.2021 and issued legal notice dated 27.7.2O2L Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶45

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 15.03.2023.

¶46

Sri P. Nagendra Prasad, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to 4.46.

¶47

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶48

The point that arise for consideration is whether th e Applicant Bank ts
entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as
prayed for? ,. '.,.-i.i .rJi-...
-4".. -, .' .,, ' i..
4|\ _. ir a-l<br>. .\ \
'.
.2 .i
.1.
r *!
..1 u {;,t.,i.rJ,.J ;n / ,r,1 .r^r
r.y'':^:..",' -j, ]
-\ rl .')..- .. ...i .r'
?^.t'-',',..;''1
.L{r,:r

¶49

(OA.No.153/2022)

¶50

The defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1 who is the official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to 4.46. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶51

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

¶52

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total Rs.98,79,323.35ps (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakhs Seventy Nine thousand Three hundred twenty three and paise thirty five only) i.e.,

¶53

a) A sum of Rs.58,22,357.23ps in respect of cash credit with further interest @ 9.35%p.a from the date of application till realization;

¶54

b) A sum of Rs.30,31,108.47ps in respect of term loan-I with further interest @ 9.350/op.a from the date of application till realization;

¶55

c) A sum of Rs.7,14,122,65ps in respect of term loan-Il with till

¶56

realization; i,i

¶57

¶58

(OA. No.153/2022)

¶59

d) A sum of Rs.3,11,735l- in respect of term loan-III with further interest @ 2,85o/op,a from the date of application till realization;

¶60

i) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the movable property as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of its d ues.

¶61

ii) the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶62

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

¶63

iv) The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶64

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶65

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶66

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1't day of Aug, 2023)

¶67

sd/-

¶68

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶69

,,#"u.'H-<br>; o lrusm ;
&'h,r*#

¶70

TRUE ^COPY
,r+:;'uffit'

Bank of India v. Shashi Pet Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Shashi Pet Industries

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 M/S. Sri Krishna Extrusion Technics

Union Bank of India versus Shri Vadla Jaya Prakash

Indian Overseas Bank versus Ms Multi Level Rehab Co.

State Bank of India versus Sri Nallathigala Surender

Union Bank of India versus Rajabhadraiah

M/S. Uco Bank, versus M/S. Bhagya Laxmi Enterprises