Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Yadagiri

DRT6 Oct 2023OA/158/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRAT disposed of Open Application No.158 of 2023 filed by Indian Overseas Bank against three defendants. Finding that the bank established its claim via documentary evidence, the tribunal decreed the recovery of a loan amount with future interest and authorized enforcement against hypothecated assets and debtor properties.

What did the court decide?

Decree recovery of Rs.36,48,409 with future interest at 12.25% p.a.; authorize proceedings against hypothecated/mortgaged properties and defendants' person/properties; issue recovery certificate.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Yadagiri — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.158 of 2023

¶3

Between :

¶4

Indian Overseas Bank, Hanumakonda bra nch, D.No.2-5-614, D Mart Side Lane, Subedari, Hanumakonda -506 001. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Mr. Vakkala Yadagiri, s/o Komuriah, aged 53 years, occ: business, male,

¶8

H.No.3-7, Sahpuram village and Gp, Sangem mandal, Warangal dist Presently Hanumakonda - 506 310.

¶9

Mrs. Vakkala Bhagyamma, w/o Mr. Vakkala Yadagiri, aged 45 years, occ: business, female, H.No.3-7, Sahpuram village and Gp, Sangem mandal, Warangal d ist Presently Hanumakonda - 506 310,

¶10

Mr. Vakkala Chiranjeevi, s/o Mr. Vakkala Yadagiri, male,

¶11

Defendants

¶12

(OA.No.158 of 2023 )

¶13

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant Sri MRS Gopal For the Defenda nts Ex^pa rte

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.35,48,4O9l- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Forty eight thousand four hundred and nine only) with future interest @ 12.25olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables and mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶16

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants availed credit facilities for a sum of Rs.20,00 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 75.04.2014. The defendants executed demand promissory note, letter of hypothecation, letter of instalments, letter of guarantee, creation of security interest as per CERSAI. The defendants executed memorandum of deposit of title deeds and thereby created equitable mortgage by way of Regd MODT bearing :-.^...-.tt.:.- .:^.,. : No.B1,2&./i014 o5t"eOr..obps.zot+, After availing the loan facitities, the , .-.1.. : t/',:^il=, defe,ndants failed to coihpli the terms of sanction, hence the applicant k r r liT li?l -i ii,l' :) 1' ,-.:"' ." l 2 ,) , :.

¶17

(OA.No.1s8 of 2023)

¶18

bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on Zg,tO,2OZz and issued notice dated 13.09.2021. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶19

Defendants 1 to 3 called absent and set exparte on t3.07.2023,

¶20

Shri A. Sai Kumar Naik, Asst. Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked

¶21

as Ex.A.1 to A.16.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶24

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶25

7' Defendants cailed absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of
the Applicant Bank, AW,1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined
and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A. 16. In view of the
above, I hold that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made
in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is
entitled to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and
-.),:'-'-. ' -.-
cosI*! -;".: ' t :?ii^' ..
l-*' i; '.",
"tu :; t'
I o E ccT 7023 I'ii 3
a'"
"itt
t: "t .-: i': /!
t'r,i'', .. ,.., r!'i,1:r$)r,ji'
, -,;''.:,. ' -'".':::1--:' '" ''.t-,irf

¶26

(OA.No.158 of 2023)

¶27

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

¶28

The Defendants are jointry and severaily riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.36,48,409/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Forty eight thousand four hundred and nine only) with future interest @ L2,25o/o p.a from date of application till the date of rea lization ;

¶29

The Applicant Bank is entitred to proceed against the hypothecated movables and mortgaged property as described in the schedule to oA.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

The Applicant sharr fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶33

t4, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶34

15, Communicate a copy of the order to the pa rties concerned.

¶35

in the open

¶36

sd/-

¶37

(G. GoPtcHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
TP"TJE EOPY
/l sst.
rrEi"r.,Y'*if

Indian Overseas Bank v. Yadagiri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Yadagiri

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

State Bank of India versus Sri. Gouri Narasimha Reddy

Uco Bank versus Mr. Kancharla Aravind Reddy

State Bank of India versus Smt. K.S.J.K. Lakshmi

Smt Ch Padmavathi versus Canara Bank

Bank of India versus M/S. S. v. Constructions

Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Sharadha Binders