Allowed

Canara Bank v. Hitech Engineering Works

DRT24 Nov 2023OA/2/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of dues, the Presiding Officer, considering evidence where defendants appeared ex-parte, held them jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed amount with interest and order the bank to file a cost memo. The application was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Respondents ordered to pay sum of Rs. 23,33,461.60 with interest @10.60% p.a. Applicants entitled to proceed against secured and unsecured properties and recover costs.

Canara Bank versus Hitech Engineering Works — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II^{AT HYDEMBAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF^{NOVEMBER,2023}

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE,^{B.COM, L.LB. (HONS'), M.A.}

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^NO. 02^{OF 2023}

¶6

Canara Bank Branch Office at Balanagar, SME Branch, Hyderabad-500037 Through its authorized representative, Mrs. Gunaganti Samatha

¶7

...'Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Hitech Engineering Works. Registered Office at 85 Balanagar, TIE Estate, Hyderabad Telangana-500037 Rep by its Propriter, Mr. Ramachandran Kasi.

¶10

Mr. Ramachandran Kasi S/o. Late Kasi, Aged about 58^years, Occ: Business, R/o Flat No. 1301, Orchids Janapriya Metropolis, Sanathnagar, ...Defendants, Hyderbad-500018 Counsel for the Applicant : A. Sravanthi. Defendants : Exparte.

¶11

O_R_D-E.a

¶12

The Applicant Bank flled the^present OA for the recovery of^a sum of Rs.23,33,426.t6/-^jointly and severally from the defendants with interest at 10.600/o^p.a. with lnonthly rests lw

¶13

oA.o2/20t9

¶14

¶15

from the date of Application till the date of realisation along with costs and sale of OA schedule^propertles.

¶16

Defendants were served with summons and were set ex-parte on 24.08.2023 as there was no representation on their behalf.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. K. Ameer Singh, Senior Manager as AW-1 and marked 13 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.13.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant reported that orders may be^passed on merits. Perused the^{materialplaced} on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule properties?

¶21

As stated supra, defendants remained ex-parte. The^Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz.,^{Exs. A1} to A.13 marked on behalf of the Applicant^{Bank clinchesthe} claim of the Applicant Bank against the^{Defendants. Hence, I} hold that the Defendants are^jointly and severally^liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future^interestand costs.

¶22

In the result, the^{present Original ApplicationNo.02l2023 is} alowed as under: - dY*"*

¶23

¶24

oA.o2l2Ot9

¶25

i) the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 23,33,462.L6ps with future interest @10.60% p.a. simple from the date of application tlll the date of realization;

¶26

iii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation/mortgage of properties described in the schedules annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entiued to proceed against the same for recovery of its balance d ues;

¶27

iv) the applicant bank is also entifled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendants for realizatlon of its balance dues;

¶28

v) the applicant bank ls entitled for the costs.

¶29

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

¶30

Issue Recovery CertiFicate accordingly.

¶31

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 24rh day of November, 2023).

¶32

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Hitech Engineering Works

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Hitech Engineering Works

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

Imbichikoya P K versus South Indian Bank

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Rongpi Tea Plantation

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus T.Nagaraju

Ms E Smart Card Solution Pvt. Ltd. versus Punjab National Bank

Union Bank of India versus M/s Panuganti Tejaswi

Union Bank of India versus Mithra Coutures