Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Sharada Enterprises

DRT27 Jun 2023OA/166/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable for the claim less auction proceeds, directing realization via mortgage and property with costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 40,70,029.31 less Rs. 24,20,000 with future interest and costs. Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' assets.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Sharada Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS TIIE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶2

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

¶3

oA. NO. t66 0F 2022

¶4

U nion Bank of India lvladha pur Bra nch Hyderabad, RR District Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶5

. ...Applica nt.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Sharada Enterprises Rep. by its^proprietor - Ch. Balasubrahma nyam Plant at Ptot No.57 H. No.4-32-124 Opp: R.S. Broi.thers Road Shapur Nagar IDA Jeedimetla, R. R. District Hyderabad - 500055.

¶8

Chennamsetti Ba las u b ra h m a nya m S/o Ch. Kesava Rao, Age: lvlajor Occ: Business, H. No.32-119/C Shapur Nagar, IDA leed imetla RR District, Hyderabad - 500 0S5.

¶9

Chennamsetti Kesava Rao s/o Kota iah, Aged: tYajor Occ: Business, H. No.32-119/C Shapur Nagar, IDA Jeedimetla RR District/ Hyderabad - 500 055.

N,*

oa.76612022

Chennamsetti Yesaswinl Wo^{Ch. Kesava Rao} Aged: Major, Occ: Business H. No. 32-119/C, Shapur^Nagar IDA Jeedimetla, RR District Hyderabad - 500 055. ... Defendants.

¶14

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. P. Balaji. Defendants '. Ex-parte.

¶15

::^qLLqB_::

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recovery of} a sum of Rs.40,70,029.31Ps, i.e.,^{Rs.34,17,137.82Pstowards} Open Cash Credit A/c^{128213100000104,Rs.6,49,168.59Ps} towards Term Loan under UGECL A/c No.128230100078965 and Rs.3,723l- towards Term Loan A/c No.128230100082560 with future lnterest @14.05o/o^p.a. with monthly^rests, from^the Defendants 1 to 4^jointly and severally from date of Application till realisation along with costs and for sale of OA schedule properties.

¶17

Summons sent to defendants 1 to 4 returned as "refused", hence they are deemed to be served. Defendants were set exparte on 18.1O.2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Thalla Raju, Chief Manager as AW-1 and marked 16 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.16. It is submitted that after filing of the OA, applicant bank sold item No,2 of the OA schedule property betonging to 4th defendant on 79,70.2022 for a sum of RS,24,2O,OOO/,.^ltry",L:;5

U/'r."

oA, t66/2O22

under SARFAESI proceedings and appropriated the sate proceeds towards Term Loan and aTGECL accounts.

¶23

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

¶24

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶25

Whether the Appticant Bank is entitted for balance OA ctaim against the Defendants and the OA remaining schedule property?

¶26

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte, The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.16 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs, less RS,24,2O,0OO/- being the sale proceeds realised under SARFAESI proceedings.

¶27

In the result, the present Original Application No.166/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶28

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 40,70,029.37Ps, tess Rs.24,2O,OOO/- realised on 19.10.2022 with future interest @12olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of rea lization; dw"

¶29

c,A.1661?:022'

¶30

¶31

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of property described at item No.1 of the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank^is entitled to^proceed against the same to^{realise its} balance dues;

¶32

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the person and^properties of the defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶33

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day of June, 2023).

¶37

OW'* (MMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S Sharada Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Sharada Enterprises

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

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Priyajuri Gold Tea

State Bank of India versus Shri Ashish Arora & Ors.

Kundan Kumar versus Bank of Baroda

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Jai Baba Tara Nath Earthmovers

Bank of India versus Shree Vinayak

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) versus M/s Shree Durga Traders and Others

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Priyajuri Gold Tea

State Bank of India versus Shri Ashish Arora &amp; Ors.

Kundan Kumar versus Bank of Baroda

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Jai Baba Tara Nath Earthmovers

Bank of India versus Shree Vinayak

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) versus M/s Shree Durga Traders and Others

State Bank of India versus Shri Ashish Arora & Ors.