Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M S Ullalthi Flexipack Pvt. Ltd.

DRT6 Nov 2023OA/6/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Bank of Maharashtra against a company and its directors/guarantors for recovery of loan dues. The court considered the bank manager's affidavit and marked documents as evidence, noting the defendants were ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 14,23,829.51 with interest and costs; liberty to sell schedule properties and proceed against other properties if dues remain unpaid.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M S Ullalthi Flexipack Pvt. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL. I, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this the 6th day of Novemb er,2023

¶4

Present: SRI IMTIAZ ALI

¶5

Hon'ble Presiding Officer

OANo.O6/2022

BETI{EEN:

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA

Mangalore Branch MANGALORE

¶10

Represented by iB Chief Manager Sucheth Marigio D'Souza

¶11

...APPLICANT

¶12

AND:

¶13

M/s. Ullalthi Flexipack Pvt. Ltd.,

¶14

Represented by its Director Sri Umesh Mahabala Shetty Having its Office at No.3-26-D, Sagu Hosamane Mani , Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannada

¶15

District - 574 253

¶16

2.Sri Umesh Mahabala Shetty

¶17

R/at No.3-26-D, Sagu Hosamane Mani, Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannada

¶18

District - 574 253

¶19

3.Smt. Shubha Umesh Shetty

¶20

R/at No.3-26-D, Sagu Hosamane Mani, Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District -574253

¶21

.. DEFENDANTS

¶22

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Sri Prakasha Hegde K. Defendants No.1to 3 i Ex-parte

oA.No.06ll2o22

FINAT ORDER

The present^{OA has been fihd by the ApplicantBank under} SectionlgoftheRecoveryofDebsandBankruptcyAcl,1993, seeking recovery^{of money of Rs'65,70,360/-(RupeesSixty Five} Lakhs Seventy^{Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty only)together} with costs, interest,^etc.

¶27

The case of the^{ApplicantBank is that' the Defendant No'1} as Borrower^{and DefendansNo'2 and 3 as Guarantors had} approached^{the Applicant Bank for Cash Credit Loan of} Rs.60,00,000/-.^{Accordingly,the ApplicantBank had consideredthe} request of^{the Defendanb and sanctioned a sumof Rs'60'00'000/-} under Loan^{Account No'60122838550on 30'01'2013'}

¶28

In order to^{securethe loan, the Defendantshave executed} various documents^{such as; RequestLetter for making Credit} Facility availabb,^{Demand PromissoryNote,Composite Deedof} Hypothecation^{for allfacilities,Deed ofGuaranteeand} Memorandum^{of Recordof Deposit of Tith Deeds by the Borrower} etc.

¶29

Further, the^{Applicant Banksubmittedthat, the Defendans}

¶30

¶31

oA.No.06//2022

¶32

have agreed to repay the Cash Credit Loan of Rs.60,00,000/- with interest at the rate of^'J,2.25o/o Per annum.

¶33

Furthe! the Defendanb have agreed to repay the Loan with variabh rate of interest, as applicable from time to time as per the directions of the Head Offrce / Central Office of the Applicant Bank and penal interest in case of default and keep the accounb regular by paytng installmenb as and when due to the satisfaction of the Applicant Bank, as detailed in the OA by the Applicant Bank.

¶34

The Defendanb after availing the said Cash Credit Loan, they failed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the sanction and committed breach by defaulting in repayment of reguhr installments. Furthef, the Defendanb had not repaid the oubtanding due amount in spite of repeated requesb and reminders by the Applicant Bank and had violated the terms and conditions of the sanction letter and loan documenb and they had failed to regularize the account and the Applicant Bank has chssified the loan account as NPA on 26.03.2021. Thereafte4, the Applicant Bank got issued Legal Notice Dated 25.10.2021 to the defendant and recalhd the entire oubtanding amount in view of the default by the Defendanb,

¶35

oA.No.06/12022

¶36

but the defendant^{have failedto char the loan dues'}

¶37

In the light ofthese^{factors,it is contendedby the Applicant} Bank that, the^{DefendanBare liable to pay a total sumof} Rs.65,70,360/- fRupees^{Sixty Five Lakhs Seventy Thousand Three} Hundred and SixtY^onlY)'

¶38

After filing^{thisOA, Summonsweresent and servedto the} DefendanB through^{RPAD. When the DefendanB No'1 to 3 were} called out, they^{remainedabsent and placedex parte'}

¶39

g. To prove the case^{of the Applicant Banh its Manager-Sri} NishitChandrahasfiledhisaffidavitbywayofevidenceandsame was considered^{as evidenceof AW.1 and markedat Ex'A1 and List of} Documents came^{to be marked at Ex.A2and 9 documents cameto} be marked at^{Ex.A3 to Ex.A11.}

¶40

During the^{pendencyof the OA., at the time of filing the} affidavit evidence^{of iE Manage4, the Applicant Bank submis that'} the Defendanb are^{liable to paythe claim amount of Rs'74,23'829'51} and also as^{per Memo filed by the ApplicantDated O5O7 '2023'}

¶41

No evidence^{on behalfoftheDefendanb'}

¶42

¶43

OA.No.06//2022

¶44

Argumenb of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff / Applicant

¶45

Bank heard and perused the records ofthe case.

¶46

Following points arise for my consideration:

¶47

Whether Plaintiff / Applicant Bank proves ib case as contended in the plaint / application?

¶48

What Order?

¶49

For the following reasons, I answer the above-referred poinb in the following manner:

¶50

REASONS

¶51

The Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. His affidavit by way of evidence reiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and his affidavit is also corroborated by the abovereferred Ex.A3 to A11 which clearly establish the case of the Applicant Bank to allow the present OA. Added to this, the Defendants No.1 to 3 are remained absent and hence placed ex parte. Therefore, it is to be construed that Defendants No.1 to 3 have admitted the entire case pleaded by the Applicant Bank in the present OA.

¶52

OA.No.06//2022

¶53

Therefore, for these reasons, present OA is to be allowed

¶54

with costs as sought by the Applicant Bank.

¶55

ORDER

¶56

Present OA stands allowed for a sum of Rs.14,23,829.51 as per Memo filed by the Applicant Bank Dated 05.07.2023 along with Statement Account, as prayed for, with interest and costs.

¶57

In the event of failure of the Defendants to pay the said OA amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to sell the Schedule Properties as mentioned in the main application in accordance with law as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA.

¶58

In spite of sale of the Schedule Properties as mentioned in the main application, if the OA amount is not fully realised, then the Applicant Bank is at liberty to^proceed against the^persons and other properties of the Defendants in accordance with law.

¶59

Applicant Bank shall file latest Memo of Calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by Defendants No.1 to 3 duly taking into account the amount/s, if any, paid by the Defendants No.1 to 3 and/or amount realised by sale ofassets, etc., during the intervening period after filing the OA, to enable the office

¶60

¶61

oA.No.06//2022

¶62

to prepare Recovery Certificate^{for the amountto be paid by the}

¶63

Defendants No.1 to 3 to the^{Applicant Bank.}

¶64

Office is directed to issue^{Recovery Certificateas sought by} the Applicant Bank in the OA^{and do the needfulas required under} the law forthwith.

¶65

The Office is directed to issue,^{as far as possible, free copy of} this order to the^parties concerned.

¶66

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and^{necessarycorrectiols,signed and} pronounced by me in the Open Court on this^{the 5thdayof November,2023)}

¶67

¶68

(IMTItrZ ALI) Presiding Officer DRT-1, Bengaluru

¶69

ANNEXURES

¶70

Witnesses examined for the^{Applicant Bank} AW-1 : Sri Nishit Chandra, the Manager ofthe Applicant Bank Documents marked on behalf^{of the Applicant Bank:} Ex.A.1: : Affidavit Evidence of AW1 Ex.AZ: : List of witnesses Ex.A3 to A11 : 9 documents.

¶71

Witnesses Examined for the Defendants:

¶72

Nil^-

¶73

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶74

Nil-

¶75

V;*" (rMTrAZ ALr) Presiding Officer DRT-1, Bengaluru

Bank of Maharashtra v. M S Ullalthi Flexipack Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M S Ullalthi Flexipack Pvt. Ltd.

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

Raju Ramavadh Ravat Anr. versus Punjab National Bank

Mrs Nankikaur Pratapsingh Mehra versus Bank of Baroda

Sarasiya dineshbhai Limbabhai versus Jana Small Finance Bank Ltd.

Icici Bank Limited versus MD Arif Kadloor

Union Bank of India versus M/S Priyanka Kirana and General Stores

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Satish Bandi