Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Thakur Service Station

DRT27 Jul 2023OA/240/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Ltd. for recovery of a loan against Thakur Service Station and others. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable and entitled the bank to recovery from hypothecated assets and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 37,38,196.40 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendants' properties; Recovery Certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Thakur Service Station — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF )ULY, 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application NO: 240 OF ZOZZ

¶4

M/S.ICICI Bank Ltd., Gachibowli, ICICI Towers, Serilingamapally Mandal, Ranga.Reddy District. Rep by its Power of Authorized Signatory And Power of Attorney Holder.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Thakur service station, Rep by its Proprietor Mr.Ramawadh Sing B Thakur, R/o. H.No.14-52, Sri Ramanagar Colony, Near Durga Matha Patancheru Municipality, Medak District-502319, Telangana State.

¶8

Also at: Thakur service station, Rep by its Proprietor Mr.Ramawadh Sing B Thakur, Ground Floor, Sy.No.70, Takur Land, NH 13, Sholapur Road, Balloli, Vijayapura(Bijapur), Karnataka - 586101, Karnataka State.

¶9

Mrs. Manoj Kumar Singh, S/o. Ramawadh Singh, Aged 49 years, Occ: Self Employee, R/o. H.No.14-5211, JMR, Near Durga Matha Temple, Patanacherru, f|^-/ {a,p

¶10

OA No.24Ol2022

¶11

Sangareddy-502319 , Telangana State.

¶12

...Defendants

¶13

: M.V'Kini Counsel for the Applicant Defendants : Exparte

¶14

:: ORDER::

¶15

1, The Applicant Bank^filed the^{present OA for the recovery of a} sum of Rs.37,38,196.40ps only as on^{22.02.2022from the} defendants^jointly and severally with future^interest @^24o/o p.a. with monthly rests from 23.02.2022 till the date of realisation along with costs, and in default, for^{sale of} hypothecated asset.

¶16

2, Summons served on D1 to 2 through^{paper publication,they} were set exparte on 27.1O.2022 as called absent and^no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. Chandra Shekar, Regional Relationship Manager, as AW- 1 and marked 9 documents through him as Ex. A.1to Ex. A.9.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the material placed 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 mentioned hypothecated asset? A (_/ s,.,

¶21

OA No.24Ol2oz2

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents Viz., Exs. A.1 to A.9 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the 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 interest and costs,

¶23

In the result, the present Original Application No,24Ol2O22 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 37,38,196.40ps with future interest @ 9.30olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶26

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

¶27

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs. ry"

¶28

¶29

O AN0.24O|ZO2Z

¶30

8' The Applicant Bank is directed to fire cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order,

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶33

1P]1:"11?"rl|"^{steno, corrected, signed andpronounced by me in theopen court} on this the 27"'day ofJuty,2023) .

¶34

fu.

¶35

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Thakur Service Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Thakur Service Station

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

Idbi Bank versus M/s Smartway Group

Union Bank of India versus Umesh

Idbi Bank versus Sushanta Kumar

State Bank of India versus Buta Singh

Ms Govindraj Traders through Its Prop Shri Vijay So Vinayak Keshattiwar versus State Bank of India

Ms Dhanshri Lal Hira Hari Patanjali Jila Vitarak Kendra and Ors. versus State Bank of India