Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S. P. S. Bore Drills

DRT29 May 2023OA/154/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application before the DRT, the bank sought recovery of dues including cash credit, term loan, and future interest. The defendants were absent. The court found the bank's claim substantiated by marked documents and allowed the application with costs, ordering payment of the principal sum, future interest, and authorization to realize the debt against hypothecated movables and defend

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.33,08,619.78 with interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated movables and defendant properties for realization and to costs.

Bank of India versus M/S. P. S. Bore Drills — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 29rH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.154 ol 2022

¶4

Between: Bank of India, Hyderabad Main branch, Nampally station road, Hyderabad, Telangana state. Represented by its Constituted Attorney

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. P.S. Bore Drills, Represented by its Proprietor Mrs B, Pallavi, Plot no.79, H.No.1-10-28 /228/79, Nagarjuna naga r colony, Hyderabad - 500 062. 2. Mrs. Basupally Pallavi, s/o Basupally Narsimha Reddy, aged about 30 yrs, occ: business, R/o H. No. 1 -10 -28/ 228/7 9-7, Naga rj u na Nagar colony, ECIL, Keesara, Hyderabad - 500 062.

¶8

Defenda nts

¶9

Counsel for the Pa rties: For the Applicant Sri Momin For the Defendants Exparte 29^rrlm ? ,} o.:-$, y^';l/t g{y.ffi

¶10

(oA. No.1s4l2022)

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA agalnst Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.33,O8,61g.7gps (Rupees Thirty three Lakhs Eight thousand Six hundred Eighteen and paise Seventy Eight only) i.e., a sum of Rs.20,99,215.09ps under cash credit and a sum of Rs.12,09,403.69ps under term loan with future interest @120lo p.a with penal interest @ addition al 2o/o p.a monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶13

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 availed cash credit of Rs.14.00 lakhs and term of Rs.10.00 lakhs respectively for doing the business on 21.03.2017. To secure the due repayment of above loan, the defendants executed demand promissory note and bearer letter dated 2l.o3.zoL7, retter of instalrment and undertaking, agreement, MCLR agreement and hypothecation cum agreement for cash credit and term loan, all dated 2L.03.20L7. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of hence to classify the NPA of seve ra I rfi: 73 l,lAY ,ffn 2 -'i ,

¶14

(oA.No.1s4l2022)

¶15

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

¶16

DeFendants were called absent set exparte on 17.O2.2023.

¶17

Sri G. Ravi Kumar, Officer of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.14.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶19

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?

¶20

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.14. 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

¶21

(OA. No.154/2022)

¶22

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under;

¶23

The Defendants are jointry and severaily riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.33,Og,61g.7gps (Rupees Thirty three Lakhs Eight thousand Six hundred Eighteen and paise Seventy Eight only) i.e., a sum of Rs.20,99,215.09ps under cash credit and a sum of Rs.12,09,403.69ps under term roan with future interest @120lo^p.a from date of application till realization.

¶24

i) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of

¶25

the debt due.

¶26

ii) the Applicant Bank is arso entifled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶27

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

¶28

iv) The Applicant shall file the date

¶29

of receipt of order.

-.'i{ ?[II1

(oA. No.15al2022)

10, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶34

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶35

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 29th day of May., 2023)

¶36

sdl -

¶37

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFTCER

¶38

+t
2 3 HnI 20n

¶39

tff.,ff;
[u<1t;l--)
I-h:*gxn'u

Bank of India v. M/S. P. S. Bore Drills

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S. P. S. Bore Drills

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K K Mohanan versus Punjab National Bank

Canara Bank versus M/s Aryan Food and Agro Enterprises P. Ltd. and Others

Bank of India versus M/S Shyam Ji Building Materials and Suppliers

Ms Rishabh Layer Farm versus Bank of Baroda

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Farming Resources LLP

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Valecha and Company