Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S Plastoman Plastic Industries

DRT22 Aug 2023OA/212/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an originalling application filed by Bank of India against M/s. Plastoman Plastic Industries and its proprietor for recovery of dues including principal, future interest, and costs, and directed the issue of a recovery certificate against their properties.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of principal amounts for cash credit and three term loans with future interest, costs, and directed issuance of recovery certificate.

Bank of India versus M/S Plastoman Plastic Industries — Company and Corporate | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST'2023

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.212 oJ 2022

¶5

Between :

¶6

Bank of India, Basheerbagh branch, H.No.3-5-822 and 3-5-22/8, Ground floor, Bashirbagh Hyderabad 500 029.Telangana State. Represented by its Chief Manager And constituted attorney

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Plastoman Plastic Industries,

¶10

Represented by its Proprietor Smt Priyanka Sirigiri, Plot no.6-5-17913, Babul Reddy Nagar, Katedan,

¶11

Hyderabad, Telangana - 5OO O77.

¶12

Second add ress:

¶13

Plot no.2, D.No.7 -3- 146/2, Sy.no.BB/89, gaganpahad village, Golconda, Hyderabad - 500 008.

¶14

Mrs. Priyana Sirigiri, w/o Abhijeet Sirigiri, aged about 37 years, 9-4-B ka katiyanaga r colony, Mehdipatnam, Hydera Proprietor of M/s. P Plastic Industries Defend a nts

¶15

loA.No.212/2022)

¶16

Counsel for the Pa rties:

For the Applicant

Sri P. Suseela

For the Defendants

Expa rte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.98,82,7o2.63ps (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakhs Eighty two thousand Seven hundred and two and paise sixty three only) i.e.,

¶23

a) a sum of Rs.72,O4,005.06ps in respect of cash credit account with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest with monthly rests from OB.O7.2OZ2 till realization ;

¶24

b) a sum of Rs.24,49,880.79ps in respect of term loan account with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest with monthly rests from 08.O7.2022 till realization ;

¶25

c) a sum of Rs.1,31,795.31ps in respect of term loan-II account with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest with monthly rests from OB.O7.Z0Z2 till realization ;

¶26

d) a sum of Rs.97,020.47ps in respect,of term loan-III account with future interest @ 7.75ok.p.a plus 2o/o p.a as penal interest , ,'/ L'..,t.:: ...r.

¶27

with monthlyq.rests fiism 0B.0tt?q22 tiil realization ')-':

¶28

' ;f i^zziutzgn ;i*,,i ii, . *"€l

¶29

(OA.No.2L2l2o22l

¶30

and in default for sale of hypothecated^{propertyas described}

¶31

in the schedule to OA.

¶32

As per the averments in the application,^{the ApplicantBank states that} the defendant No.1 firm^{represented by its proprietor/defendantno.2} availed cash credit for a sum of^{Rs.60.00lakhs and term loanof} Rs.38.00 lakhs for running business on^{26.L2.2017with a condition} of hypothecation of stocks and books,^{plant & machinery of the} defendant no.1 firm. The defendant no.2^{proprietor of defendant} no.1 executed^promissory note for^{Rs.60.00 lakhs, bearerletter dated} 26.12.2017, hypothecation cum^{loan agreement, letter of declaration,} comprehensive agreement, MCLR agreement,^{UCC agreementand etc.} The applicant bank sanctioned Rs.1,26,98Ol- for^{upgrading the cash} credit account and Rs. 93,475/- to^pay the^{overdueinstallments.} After availing the loan facilities, the^{defendantsfailed to complythe} terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was^{constrainedto} classify the account as NPA on 30.6.2021 and^{issued legal notice} dated 10.07.2021. Inspite of several^{requests and demands,the} defendants did not clear the outstanding.^HencethisOA.

¶33

22 [u8M

¶34

lO^{A.No.zL2/20221}

¶35

shri R. Sarath Kumar, chief Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.46.

¶36

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

7 ' The defendants were cailed absent and set exparte, To substantiate the case of the Appricant Bank, AW.1 who is the officiar of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to 4.46. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶40

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

¶41

¶42

(oA.No.2L2/2022J

¶43

a) a sum of Rs.72,04,005.06ps in respect of cash credit account with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a from 08.07.2022 till realization;

¶44

b) a sum of Rs.24,49,880.79ps in respect of term loan account with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a from 08.07.2022 till realization ;

¶45

c) a sum of Rs.1,31,796.31ps in respect of term loan_II account with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a from Og.O7.2O2Z till realization ;

¶46

d) a sum of Rs.97,O2O.47ps in respect of term loan_III account

¶47

with future interest @ 7.75o/o p.a from OB.O7.ZO22 till the date of realization.

¶48

The Appricant bank is entitred to proceed against the hypothecated property as described in the schedure to oA towards rearization of its dues.

¶49

the Applicant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶50

¶51

two weeks from the date

¶52

loA.No.212/2022].

¶53

Issue Recovery certificate^accordingly.

¶54

Communicate^{a copyof the order to the partiesconcerned'}

¶55

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed^{byher, corrected, signed and pronouncedby me in the open} court on this the^{22nd day of Aug,2023)}

sd/_

(G. GOPICHAND)

PRESTDING OFFICER

? ? [uB?u[

TRUE POro .^t':W:^{P'Y

Bank of India v. M/S Plastoman Plastic Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S Plastoman Plastic Industries

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus M/s Narasimha Traders

Indian Bank versus M/S. Siddhartha Logistics

Indian Bank versus M/S. Yamjala Vimala

Union Bank of India versus M/S. R.K. Distributors

State Bank of India versus Syed Sadiq Hussian

M S Sai Ram Krishna Motorbikes Private Limited versus State Bank of India