Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Mhammed Rafi

DRT8 Jun 2023OA/445/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of a loan sum of approximately 30.72 lakhs jointly and severally against the two defendants based on ex-parte proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 30,72,459.33 with 13% interest; Bank entitled to proceed against the hypcotated asset and Defendants' properties; Costs awarded.

Icici Bank Limited versus Mhammed Rafi — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE8TH DAY OF ]UNE, 2023}

¶2

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

¶3

Original^{ApPllcatlon. No: 445 of 2022}

¶4

Between:

¶5

ICICI Bank^Limited Gachi Bowli Branch ICICI Towers SerilingamPallY^Mandal Ranga ReddY^District Represented^{bY its} Auihorised Signatory,

¶6

"^Applicant'

¶7

And

¶8

Mr.Shaik^MohammedRafl S/o Shaik Maqbool^Basha, Aged about⁴⁰ Years, Occ: Self EmPloyee, R/o.3- 135,^{Brahmanakotkur,} Near Masjid,^Nandikotkur, Kurnool, Kurnool^District, Andhra Pradesh-518432.

¶9

Mr.Chukkabotla^Nagaraju S/o. Chukkanotla^{Pedda Subbanna,} Aged about 45 Years, occ: Self Employee, R/o. 7-167 , Near SC^Colony, HussainaPuram,^Kurnool, Kurnool District-518010, Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

" 'Defendants'

¶11

: M.V.Kini Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: ExParte

OYe

oA.44512022

:: O R D E R ::

The Applicant Bank filed the above OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.30,72,4S9.33ps join y and severally from the Defendants with future interest @24olo p.a with monthly rests from 21.01.2022 till the date of realization with costs, and in default, for sale of OA schedule asset.

¶18

The defendants were served with sUmmons. The defendants

¶19

were set exparte on 27,09.2022 as called absent and no

¶20

representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined Mr.Sathish Manappuram, Zonal Debt Manager, as AW.1 and marked 9 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.9.

¶22

Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused

¶23

the material placed on record.

¶24

The point that arise for consideration is:

¶25

Whether the Appticant Bank is entiued to the claim made in OA against the defendants and the OA schedule asset?

¶26

As stated supra, the defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit of AW1 coupted 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 joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank the ctaim made in OA with future interest and coss/7fr\r0--^ t_/1tr.*

¶27

oA.4451202?

¶28

In the result, the present Original Application No.445/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶29

i) the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.30,72,459.33ps with further interest @13olo p.a simple from the date of application till realization;

¶30

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 proceed against the same to realise its dues;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery Certiflcate accordingly.

¶35

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 8ih day of June, 2023).

¶36

(fifia'>!-4rrr^

¶37

(MMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Mhammed Rafi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Mhammed Rafi

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

Central Bank of India versus Sanjeev

Mrs Nirmala Kishor Agrawal Prop Ms Shakambari Collection versus Nagpur Nagarik Sahakari Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ram Gopal

Shaktisingh Rajkumar Yadav versus Shubham Housing Development Finance Company Limited

Uco Bank versus Vinay and Co.

Yavatmal Urban Co. Operative Bank versus Hdfc Bank