Allowed

Canara Bank v. M S Krishna Eco Solutions

DRT18 Jul 2023OA/265/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for recovery of loan of Rs. 28.29 lakhs against the respondents, constituting them as jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 28,29,951.97 with future interest; bank entitled to recovery from hypothecated assets and properties.

Canara Bank versus M S Krishna Eco Solutions — DRT (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2023

¶2

PItESENT; SRI cUMMADI GOpICHAND, pRESIDING OFFICER OA.No.265 OF 2OZ2

¶3

Between:

¶4

Canara []a n k, Branch office at N.S. Road, D.No,5^.3-1.062, Veerji towe_.rs, Osman,Sunj area, Opp Uotcl Jewel Residerrcy, Near Old p.S. Begurn tlazar, Hyderabad * 500 00l -f ela ngii na State. Represr:nted by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applica nt

¶6

VERSTJ:;

¶7

lv /s. Krishna Eco Solutions, llepresented by its proprietor Sri tlakesh Roshan Ja irr, s^/o Latc l{amchande r .lain, s7.No.48, plot no.B5 (part), 1l)A, Kaltcdan, tlyclcrabad -5OO Oi'Z. 2. Sri Rakesh lloshan .lain HUF, ttep by its Kartha Sri Rakesh Roshan Jain, s./o Late Ramchander lain, malc, Proprietor of M/s. Krislrna Eco Solr"itions, a3cd 50 ycars, Occ: brrsincss, R/o Plot no.85 (part), Sy.No.48, hydcrabad lDA, - 500 Kattedan,07 / and k*'""* Ir/o 3-6- 161, flat no.504, Street no.17, legend 3 Apartmcnts, 1I JUt 2.[A hrmayathr)ag,tr, Hy<tcraba<.l - SOO OZg..?+ tI**!",,,,"q# "Wr*B

¶8

(OA.No.)651)U))

¶9

3.	SriRakeshtl.oshan Jain, s,roLate RamchanderJain, nrale,aged 50 years,occ:business, R/oPlotno.B5(part), Sy.No.48,IDA,Kattedan, t-ryderabad-500 077and tl/o3-6-1"61.,flatno.504, Street no.l.-/,legend3 Apartrnents, Himayathnaqar,llydcrabad-500029.
4,	Sri ChitreshJain, s,/oSriRakeshRoshan Jain, aged 26 years,occ:business, tl/o3-6-161,flatno.504, Streetno.1-/, legend3Apartments, Himayathnaqar, Hyderabad-500029. Defendants
Co	unselfortheParties:
For	theApplicant Sri A.V.S.S.Prasad
For	theDefendants Exparte

¶10

.q^3_D_E.E

¶11

I he Applicant tsank filed the present oA against Defendants f or 'ecovery^{of a total sum of Rs.2.8,29,9s1-.97ps (Rupees} Twenty Eight Lakhs Twenty nine thousand Nine hundred fity one and paise Ninety Seven only) with future interest @'r l7,B0o/op.a with ronthly rests frorn alization and in

¶12

¶13

(OA. No. 2 6 l,/,)(1,r,' l

¶14

'lefault^{for sale} or hrypothecated <lssets as described irr thc schecruri: :o oA.

¶15

/'s per the averments in the appracation, the Appricant uank states that the dcfendant No..1 being sole proprietary firm in thc namc and styl. cf M/s. Krishna Eco Solutions availed loan limit of OCC/OD for a sum cf Rs.25.00 lakhs against hypothecated machinery purchascd from Lank frnance. I hc defendants No.s1,2 and 3 along with Smt Rajini lain and Ms. Mohlni Jain executed cash credit agreement datcd 29.12-.2020. Defenclants no.3 and 4 cxecuted guarantee aqrocrn.nl c. aLt:d 29.12.2020. Aft.er avairinq the roan facirities, the defcndanrs f eiled to conrply the tcrms of sanction, hencc r.he appricant barrk was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued noticc cratcrl 10.o1.)022. Inspite of several requests and dcmands, tht:

¶16

cefcndants did not clear the outstanding. Hcnce this OA.

¶17

[)cfcndants were called absent and set expartc] on l '].0 I.?O)3.

¶18

S;ri K.P linganna, officer of the Appricant r]ank cxamincd hinrscri. a:, /,W.1 and cxlribited rclevant <locuments, which arc markcd as I x./. I L3 A. 5.

¶19

lleard the Ld.

¶20

18 ,rtf, lQ3

¶21

(oA No.rtr';7){)221

¶22

'l he point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Llarik is € ntitled for the claim made in the OA against thc Deft:ndants as F^{rayed for?}

¶23

lhe defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiat0 the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1. who is the official of lho /,pplicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as E x.A1 to A.5. In view of the above, I hold that the Appllcant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendanls ancl I ence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the clalm madc rn thi: C)A with future interest and costs.

¶24

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with cosls, as undcr;

¶25

9- -l he Dcfcrrdants No,I to 4 are jorntly and scverally liable t.o pay to thc Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs,28,29,951.97ps (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakhs Twenty nine thousand Nine hundred fifty one anci paise Ninety Seven only) with future int.erest (o) L7.B0o/op.a front ')l.OB.?O22 till the date of realization till thc dato ol reali/atio11.

¶26

_,---;'

¶27

i) Thc Appticant bank rs f6*6Fq agarnst Lhe hypotl'cc.lle d i.-^-,

¶28

di>,iIi as^(les(:rr[)u6 in tnc scn,'dulc wards rea liz a t. io n of it!, ducs.

¶29

ri... I
i'.-'.^it
'- .'- ?;f,
1' r l' i',r- . r '-'. '
t$rll
-i'.,+i;/'
t:-: -; .--.", '' >2/
!{.:- -/- j,.-

¶30

iiJA^i\t;

¶31

ii) T-hc applicant bank is also entitled to procccd aqainsf thc [)crs;oit and properties of defendants No.2 to 4 and propcrtics of clef r:nd.trri. no.1 firm towards realization ol the debt duc.

¶32

iir) Ihc Applicant B;:nk is entitled to the costs of Lhe OA.

¶33

iv) T"he Applicant shall f ile a cost merno within two wce:ks from t.he darti: of receipt of order.

¶34

I0. Issue [lecovery certificate accordingly.

¶35

1.1.^{(.ontmunicate} a copy of the order to the^{partics concerrrcd.}

¶36

(t)ict ;tccl to the P.A., transcribed by hcr, corrcctcd, sigrlccl^{atlcl pronoutrcCtl l-i;' rrru,rr Li-.} ( ourl orr tttrs tltc 1 [Jtr day ttf )uly, 20? 3)

¶37

sd/^_

¶38

(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICEii

¶39

'4i.."'ril '
*a
1 0 JiJ!. am

¶40

Canara Bank v. M S Krishna Eco Solutions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M S Krishna Eco Solutions

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

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Puja Plastic Industry

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Dinesh Electronics

Shri Pandit So Dattarao Sarnaik versus Motilal Oswal Home Finande Ltd.

Neha Gupta versus Hdfc Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.

Ms Sanatan Logistics Pvt. Ltd. versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Satya Inc.