Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri Chilmala Krishna

DRT17 Oct 2023OA/51/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.S1 of 2022, the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Hyderabad allowed the application filed by Canara Bank against Sri Chilmala Krishna for recovery of an outstanding term loan amount of Rs. 23,33,547.40 with interest and costs for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 23,33,547.40 with interest; entitlement to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and properties; recovery certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus Sri Chilmala Krishna — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.S1 of 2022

¶4

Between :

¶5

Canara Bank, Shivajinagar Branch, Nizamabad district, Telangana State- 503 001. Represented by its authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri Chilmala K rish n a, S/o C. Poshaiah, aged 43 years, Occ: business, R/o H.No.11-1-116, Quarter^{no.57, LIGH-2, APHBcolony,} Kanteshwar, Nizamabad district -503 002.

¶9

Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Pa rties:

For the Applicant

Smt M. Kanaka Durga

For the DeFendant

Shri T. Sridhar Reddy

¶15

ORDER

¶16

i.1 1. The ;.,'1&pplicant,Ban k the present OA against Defendant for rec$vervly 6gfffisumi Rs.23,33,547.40ps (Rupees Twenty Qwirr

¶17

(OA.No.51/2022)

¶18

three lakhs Thirty three thousand Five hundred forty Seven and paise forty only) with interest @ 9,90o/o p.a from 01.12.2020 till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant availed vehicle roan for purchase of passenger bus and availed term roan of Rs.21.00 rakhs vide sanction dated 29.04'2020. The defendant executed required documents incruding loan agreement in favour of the Appricant bank. The defendant paid few installments but subsequentry committed defaurt of monthry installments. After avairing the Ioan facirities, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA and issued regar notice dated 17.11.2021. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA,

¶20

Shri T. Sridhar Reddy filed vakalath for defendant but not filed Written statement. Hence the right of filing of WS was forfeited on 13.01.2023.

¶21

Shri G. Gopal, Officer of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited as Ex.A.1 to A.6. ),, i t 0lT IWJ :

¶22

(oA.No.s1l2022)

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendant as prayed for?

¶25

counsel for Defendant fired vakalath but not filed written statement. To substantiate the case of the Appricant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.Al to A'6. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶26

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶27

The Defendant is riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a totar sum of Rs.23,33,547.40ps (Rupees Twenty three lakhs Thirty three thousand Five hundred forty Seven and paise forty only) with interest @ 9.90% p,a from Ol.L2.2O2O till the date of realization ;

¶28

The Applicant Bank is entitred to'pro.ceed against the hypothecated 1.. rtt t, vehicle as describedtln the schedule to da\ - . 17ti;itfr/J .jj! ..i.' . 3 - -^:. , iJ.''l . ':'^.' ,r.1 . \ -;:^:. ..1,,^i-.'. .t^-".'./:: ' 1-:-, '^.' i^,- :.'.t-i-.111 :'..,. ,.<.--..-..,"..

¶29

(OA.No.s1l2022)

¶30

the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶31

T2, The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶32

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶33

L4. Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶35

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th day of Oct, 2023)

¶36

sd/-

¶37

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

'S;ru:;t!

¶39

, RUF^coPy
,r;;1ffi,

Canara Bank v. Sri Chilmala Krishna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri Chilmala Krishna

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Saras Enterprises

Mr Anwar Ali Jiwani versus Union Bank of India

Karmali Samnani versus Union Bank of India

Smt Kethavath Maji versus Bank of Baroda

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S. Kunta Raja Govindu and Sons

State Bank of India versus M/S. Surex Auto Works