Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Syed Ashfaq Ahmed

DRT14 Mar 2023OA/241/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No. 241 of 2022, the Applicant Bank claimed recovery of Rs.20,05,924/ with interest and costs against the Defendant. The Defendant appeared ex-parte. The Tribunal examined evidence and held the Defendant liable, allowing the application and declaring the debt recoverable from specified assets and person.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.20,05,924/- with 15% interim interest; claim secured by hypothecated assets; recovery certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Syed Ashfaq Ahmed — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-IIAT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE^{14TH DAY OF MARCH,2023}

¶3

PRESENT: RAMESHWHAR^{KOTHE, B.COM.,LL'B. (HONS. ), M'A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.NO. 241 of²⁰²²

¶5

Between:

¶6

) ICICI Bank Limited Gachi Bowli Branch ICICI Towers Serillngampally Mandal Ranga Reddy District Represented by its Authorised SignatorY^& Power of Attorney Holder.

¶7

......Appllcant

¶8

And

¶9

Mr. Syed Ashfaq Ahmed S/o Syed Iqbal, Age: 34 Years Occupation: Self EmPloYee R/o D. No. 22-6-65513 Mailaram Mandi, Charminar Opp: Police Station Hyderabad - 500 002. Telangana State

¶10

Also at: Mr. Syed Ashfaq Ahmed S/o Syed Iqbal, Age: 34 Years Occupation : Self Employee Rlo 79-4-28UAlt3-74 Nawab Shab Kunta Near ST Anas Hospital Bahadur Pura Hyderabad-500 053 Telangana State.

¶11

.......Defendant.

¶12

Counsel for applicant Defendants

¶13

M. V. Kini. ........ Exoarte.

d%"'""

oA.24r/2022

:: o R D E R ::

The Applicant Bank filed the above OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.20,05,924/ - from the Defendant and O schedule properties with future interest @24o/o p.a with monthly rests from 23.02.2022 till the date of realization and costs.

¶18

The defendant served summons through paper publication. He was set exparte on t2.08.2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined M. Satish, Zonal Debt Manager, as AW_ 1 and marked 6 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.6.

¶20

Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arise for consideration is:

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank /s entitled to proceed against the defendant and OA schedule hypothecated assets as prayed for?

¶23

As stated supra, the defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit of AW1 coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.6 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank, clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank the claim made in OA with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, this O.A.241/2022 is allowed declaring that;

¶25

i) the Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.2O,05,924/- with further interest @15olo p.a simple from the date of application till realization; A*t u^-'(Yt>

¶26

oA.24L/2022

¶27

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

¶28

iii) the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the DeFendant towards realization of its dues;

¶29

iv) the Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA, including the Advocate fee.

¶30

The Applicant Bank is directed to file 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. (Dictated to the Steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 14th day of March, 2023)

¶33

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Syed Ashfaq Ahmed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Syed Ashfaq Ahmed

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Ranjeet Pandey

M/S.Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S.Shakunthala Industries

Bank of India versus M/S.Supreme Pharma

Mariyamma John versus Thiruvalla Urban Cooperative Bank

State Bank of India versus M/S Life Care Children Hospital

State Bank of India versus Ms Auto Plaanate Indostry Pvt. Ltd.