Allowed

Canara Bank v. M S Bismilla Agency

DRT30 Aug 2023OA/4/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an Origination Application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of an outstanding loan amount totaling approximately Rs. 1.09 crore. The court allowed the application, holding that the bank established its claim against the defendants, who are jointly and severally liable to repay the dues along with future interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 1,09,77,844.57 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged/hypothecated properties and personal properties of respondents 2 to 4.

Canara Bank versus M S Bismilla Agency — Insurance | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 3OTH DAY OF AUGUST'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.4 of ZO2g

¶4

Between :

¶5

Canara Bank, Bahadurpura branch, t9-2-227 / 4-19, 1st floor, Aspire Mall, Bahadurpura X Road, Hyderabad - 500 264, Represented by its authorised officer & Senior Branch Manager Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. BISMILLA AGENCY, Represented Uy its niop'rietor. Sri Mohd Abdut Majid (mate) S/o Sri Abdul Wahab, Rlo t9-2-Bt/9, Khaja pahadi, Tadbun, Bahadurpura. Hyderabad - 500 064. 2. Sri. Mohd. Abdut Majid (mate) s/o Sri Abdul Wahab, Proprietor of M/s, Bismilla Agency, Aged major, occ: business, R/o t9-2-Bt/9, Khaja pahadi, Tadban, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad - 500 064.

¶8

Smt Khursheed Begum (female)
w/o Sri Abdul Wahab,
aged major, occ: business, #F'
1 0 AilE iiin

¶9

(oA.No.a/2023)

¶10

R/o B-15-19/683/2, Sashtripu ram, Mailardevpally, Rajendranagar, RR dist - 500 052. 4. Sri Abdul Wahab (mate), s/o Sri Gaffar Ahmed, aged major, occ: business, R/o B-15-19/683/2, Sashtripuram, Mailardevpally, Rajendranagar, RR dist - 500 052. Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant Sri AVSS Prasad For the Defenda nts Expa rte

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.L,O9,77,g44.S7ps (Rupees One Crore Nine Lakhs Seventy Seven thousand Eight hundred forty four and paise fifty seven only) with future interest @ B.B5o/o p.a with monthly rests from Ot.lZ.2O22 till realization and in default for sale of hypothecated assets and mortgaged properties as described in the schedule to OA.

¶14

As Bank states that the represented by

¶15

(oA.No.4/2023)

¶16

defendant no.2, defendant no.3 stood as guarantor availed loan for a sum of Rs.30.00 lakhs in2015 and it was enhanced in the year 2017 against the mortgage of schedule mentioned item I & II properties. Defendant no.4 created mortgage for entire sum of Rs.99 lakhs which was sought for by defendants 1 & 2 along with defendants 3 & 4 apart from creation of equitable mortgage by way of extension in respect of schedule B "item I & II" to OA. The defendants executed general agreement cum hypothecation agreement dated 11.10.2019, guarantee agreement by defendants 2 to 4 in favour of applicant bank. Defendant no.3 deposited title deeds document no.90U19g1 for schedule B (item I & II) property. Defendant no.4 deposited title deeds document no.12120/L992 for schedule B (item III) property. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued demand notice on 15.02.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶17

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 03.04.2023.

¶18

Shri K. Vamsidhar himself as AW.1 and as Ex.A.1 to A.10.

¶19

(oA.No.a/2023)

¶20

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶21

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?

¶22

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 A.10. 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.

¶23

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

¶24

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.L,o9,77,844.57ps (Rupees one crore Nine Lakhs Seventy seven thousand Eight hundred forty four and paise fifty seven only) with future interest @ B.B5o/o p.a from 01.12.2022 till realization.

¶25

i) The Applicant bank is entitred to proceed against the mortgaged -. '^:_

¶26

properties and hypothecated proper.ty. as described in the schedule _ dro ... :-\ '.

¶27

to OA towards realiz'ation of its dues. ii. ),

¶28

'':, '., . :l -,: i!

¶29

.,, ..:a , :

¶30

¶31

(oA.No.a/2023)

¶32

ii) the Applicant Bank is also entltled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 4 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery certificate a cco rd in g ly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 3oth day of Aug, 2023)

¶38

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

,W,,,,

Canara Bank v. M S Bismilla Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M S Bismilla Agency

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kamalla Stalin

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Dream House Cine Techniq

Indian Bank versus Sri Sandrapalli Venkata Bipin Kumar

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Kirana and General

State Bank of India versus M/S. Vishnu Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus M/S .Joyce Industries