Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. N Raghavender Kumar

DRT10 Nov 2023OA/301/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an exparte recovery proceeding, the Debts Recovery Tribunal found the defendant liable based on the bank's evidence affidavit and marking documents, allowing the application and directing payment of dues with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs. 30,58,411.12 with future interest @ 10.75% p.a. simple; applicant entitled to proceed against person and properties; costs awarded.

Hdfc Bank versus N Raghavender Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE loth DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 3O1 OF 2022

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd., Having its office at # 7-10-6013, 3'd Floor, Suryodaya Complex, Begumpet, Secunderabad l"landal, Hyderabad-500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. N Raghavender Kumar, S/o. Raj Kumar, Aged: 38 Years, Occ: Pvt. Employee, R/o. H. No. l6-ll-16/M/62 & 63, Near Ramchandra College East, Moosarambagh, Prasanth Nagar, Hyderabad-500036.

¶8

Also at: Mr. N Raghavender Kumar, C/o. Optum Global Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Phonix Infocity Pvt. Ltd., Building No. H06 3d Floor, ..Defendant Hitech City, Hyderabad-500081

¶9

Counsel for the Appllcant : Mr. lv'|. Srinivas Reddy Defendants tExpafte(ry.*f,

¶10

oA.NO.30U2022

¶11

:: ORDER::

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 30,58.411.12ps from the defendant with future interest @ 18o/o p.a. with quarterly interests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs.

¶13

Summons sent to sole defendant returned with endorsement Refused, hence deemed to be served. He was set exparte on 29.Oa.2O22 as called absent and no representation.

¶14

The Applicant Bank examined M. Meenakshi, Manager_Legal, as AW-1 and marked 7 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex.

¶15

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed on merits. perused the material placed on record.

¶16

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶17

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?

¶18

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.7 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 the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs. fAV,,r ,_- zr{.\-,

¶19

oA.NO.301/2022

¶20

In the result, the present Original Application No.301/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶21

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 30,5g,411.12ps with future interest @ 10.75olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶22

ii) the applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant for realization of its dues;

¶23

iii) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶24

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

¶25

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶26

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 los Day of November, 2023) .

¶27

OY"# (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank v. N Raghavender Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. N Raghavender Kumar

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 Mrigen Sutradhar

I Tech Advance Inspection Services versus Bank of India

Bank of India versus Gauravbhai

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Preeman Animal Rench

Mrs Usha Nandini versus the Karanataka State Cooperative Apex Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Parveen Singh