Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Mangi Banoth

DRT17 May 2023OA/324/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an originating application filed by ICICI Bank Limited against three respondents for recovery of a loan principal with interest and costs, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable based on documentary evidence presented ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of joint and several liability for Rs. 32,51,019 + interest; permission to proceed against hypoecated assets, personal properties, and issue Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Mangi Banoth — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-IIAT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE^{17THDAY OF MAY,2023}

¶3

PRESENT: RAMESHWHAR^{KOTHE,B'Com',LL'B'(Hons')'M'A'} PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶4

OA.NO. 324^{of 2022}

¶5

Between:

¶6

ICICI Bank Limited Gachi Bowli^Branch ICICI Towers SerilingampallY^Mandal Ranga ReddY^District Represented^bY Zonal Debt Manager. "^Applicant'

¶7

And

¶8

Mrs. Mangi Banoth D/o Bichha Tejavath Age: 40 Years, Occ:^SelfEmPloYee R/o H. No. 3-122/7

¶9

NagaiPallY, Near^{Water Tank} NagaipallY, MadhaPur Nalgonda Dist.-508116 Telangana State.

¶10

Mrs. Bichani BhukYa D/o BadYa Banavath

¶11

Age: 54 Years,^{Occ: SelfEmPloYee} R/o 1-60, Near^{Water Tank} Kesya Thanda,^Dharmaram Nalgonda Dist.-508116 Telangana State.

¶12

B. Lalu, S/o BaddiahBanoth Age: 49^years, Occ:^SelfEmPloYee R/o H. No. 3-l22ll

¶13

Nagaipally, Near Water^Tank Nagaipally, MadhaPur Nalgonda Dist.-508116 Telangana State. ....... Defendants.

¶14

¶15

oA.324/2022

¶16

Counsel for applicant M.V. Kini. Defendants Exparte.

¶17

:: O R D E R ::

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the above OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.32,51,019/- joinfly and severally from the Defendants with future interest @24o/o p.a with monthly rests from 04.03.2022 till the date of realization with costs.

¶19

The defendants were served with summons. The defendants were set exparte on 12.09.2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

3, The Applicant Bank examined M. Satish, Zonal Manager, as AW.1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.12.

¶21

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

¶22

The point that arise for consideration is:

¶23

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled to the claim made in OA against the defendants and the OA schedule asset?

¶24

As stated supra, the defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit of AW1 coupled with the recitals in the documents viz,, Exs. A.1 to A.12 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 (-/ ,dy**''o'o

¶25

oA.32412022

¶26

and severally liable to^{pay to the Applicant Bankthe claim} made in OA with^{futureinterestand costs.}

¶27

In the result, this O.A.324l2022^{is alloweddeclaring that;}

¶28

i) the Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay to the^{Applicant Bank a total} sum of Rs.32,51,019/-^{with further interest} @11.30%^{p.a simPle from the dateof} application till realization;

¶29

ii) the OA claim is^{secured bY way of} hypothecation of asset described^{in the} schedule annexed to the^{OA, and the} applicant bank^{is entitled to proceedagainst} the same to realise^its dues;

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

B. The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{this order.}

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly'

¶34

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the parties concerned.} (Diclated lo lhe Sleno, correcled, signetl und pronounced by nte in^theopen courl^on this the t/' clay oJ May, 2023t

¶35

Hf''r

¶36

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Mangi Banoth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Mangi Banoth

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

Sri M Anil Kumar versus Bank of Baroda

Shailendra S/O Purushottam Mangal, versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Santpal Singh

Bank of Baroda versus M/S R. R. Enterprises

Punjab National Bank versus Sukhwant Singh

Sanjay Gokal @ Sanjay Sharma versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited