Allowed

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Belur Ramgopal Prathyush Ram

DRT12 Sept 2023OA/52/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant bank filed application for recovery of education loan with interest against borrowers and guarantors. Tribunal examined evidence affidavit and documents, found defendants liable, and decreed payment of outstanding sum plus interest.

What did the court decide?

Duty to pay Rs. 26,51,120.87 with future interest @ 9.2% p.a.; proceeds against mortgaged properties; proceeds against persons and properties for dues.

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Belur Ramgopal Prathyush… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2O2S

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.52/2022

¶5

IDBI Bank Ltd., Basheerbagh branch, Hyderabad

¶6

Rep. By its Asset General Manager

¶7

Mrs. D.V. Krishna Kumari.

¶8

Applicant.

¶9

Versus

¶10

1.Mr. Belur Ramgopal Prathyush Ram, S/o Mr.B.N. Ramgopal, aged 38 years, Flat No.802, Block No.9, Manasarovar Heights, Manovikas Nagar, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad-500 009.

¶11

2 Mr. B.N. Ramgopal,

¶12

S/o late BC Nagappa Setty, aged 62 years, Flat No.802, Block NO.9, Manasarovar Heights, Manovikas Nagar, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad-500 009

¶13

Mrs. B.R. Nandini,

¶14

W/o B.N. Ramgopal, aged 59 years, Flat No.802, Block NO.9, Manasarovar Heights, Manovikas Nagar, Tirumalgiri, Secunderabad-500 009

¶15

....Defendants.

¶16

Counsel for the Applicant : M/ s Tiuikram Chitturu Counsel Jbr Defendants :Srr iV. Balu

¶17

.:ORDER:-

¶18

_.1 ,::\ :',j::-. --'-,
'{ii "<br>1.
The Applicant:,rBank fip&a. tne present original Application against
Defendants Nb.l to "pt'i for recovery of a total sum of
' i2sEP2$23 ,.i;
' :riJ'
:..; "', i;
r'r:i '-i " r"-
,'l'.'.. - r' ''': "' t
': ' ''':. -1,.'.:''? " '',';-1'1;'sii' 1';' ,' ''
-i;.] "...[;;1.r,.-;.; ; .;,^,,rr. 'r'i-rj;.'r;- .. -r

¶19

oAs2/2022

¶20

Rs.26,51,120.87 ps. (Rupees Twenty six lakhs fifty one thousand one hundred twenty and paise eighty seven only) together with future interest @^{9.2oo/o p.a. plus penal interest with monthly restsfrom the date of} application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged properties described in Schedules to the O.A..

¶21

The case of the Applicant Bank, in brief, is that, at the request of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Education loan of Rs.20 lakhs for defendant No. 1 to pursue MS in France. The defendants No.2&3 stood as guarantors to secure the loan availed by Defendant No. 1 and executed Guarantee Agreement on 19.01.2017. To further secure the due repayment of the loan, Defendant No.2 had deposited the title deeds of immovable property to create equitable mortgage in favour of the Applicant Bank to secure the Housing loans and another education loan taken for the studies of his daughter and the same was extended to secure the loan availed by the defendants by way of Extension of Memorandum of Deposit of title deeds. After availing the^loan,the defendants committed default in payment of dues. In^{spite of repeated} requests and demands made by the Applicant bank, the defendants^failed to discharge the debt and accordingly the Bank issued^{Demand Notice} dt. 16.08.2021 under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 calling^upon the Defendants to pay the outstanding dues..^{Hence theOA.}

¶22

J. Defendants No. 1 to 3 hled their Written Statement. The contentions^{of the} Defendants as seen from their Written Statement, in brief, are that,^the Applicant Bank though sanctioned the loan of Rs.2O lakhs,^{violated the} terms of the sanction and started debiting the interest during the disbursement . and Moratorium period. The Bank had taken^security No.2 and used the said cheques to debit ,11:t _ interedf and a15o further submitted that the Defendant No.2 !,.-:

l2s

oA s2/2O22

also preferred a complaint against the Applicant in Telangana Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the irregularities committed by the Applicant Bank. Accordingly prayed to dismiss the OA.

¶27

The Applicant Bank, to substantiate its claim, hled its Evidence Afftdavit, duly sworn in by Smt. D.V. Krishna Kumari AGM, of the Applicant^Bank as AW.1 and through her marked L0 documents as^{Exs.A.1 to A10.As} against which, Defendants did not choose to^{enter into witnessbox to} substantiate their contentions and controvert the^{evidence of AW- 1 in} spite of taking several adjournments and^{defendants sideevidencewas} closed.

¶28

Now, the point that arise for consideration^{is whether the Applicant Bank} has proued its claim against Defendants^{No.1 fo} 3^{as madein the OA?}

¶29

Heard Ld. Counsel for the Applicant^{Bankand no representation} from defendants side.

¶30

7 . Defendants filed written statement,^{admittedthe avialment of loan} facilities and execution of documents but^{disputed the sanction of loan} proceeds and rate of interest. However,^{absolutely there is no evidence} on record from the side of the^{Defendants to controvertthe evidence} placed on record by the Applicant Bank. The Evidence of^{AW-1 coupled} with the recitals in the documents viz.^{Ex.A1to A10 clinchingly establish} the claim of the Applicant Bank against^{the Defendants.HenceI hold that} Defendants No. 1 to 3 are liable to^pay to^{the ApplicantBank the claim} made in the O.A. with future interest and^costs.

¶31

In the result, the present Original Application ailowed, with costs, as under: - '^.:,',

¶32

'^.:,', 12 SP2C8

¶33

oA 52/2022

¶34

Defendants No. 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant bank a total sum of Rs.26,S 1,120.g7 ps. (Rupees Twenty six lakhs fifty one thousand one hundred twenty and paise eighty seven only) together with future interest @ 9.2Oo/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶35

ii) The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties described in Schedules to the O.A. towards realization of the debt due;

¶36

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

¶37

iv) The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶38

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 15 days from today.

¶39

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶40

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶41

(Dictated to the P.A, transcribed bg her, conected., signed and. pronounced by me in the open court on this the 121, daA of September, 2023).

¶42

-r' . q)r -:.,Y ', A^ .. (G. GOPTCHAND
":-.;E-s]N PRESIDING OFFICER
tii li .i t,
1 12SEP'*-Jr}
,-'.-o.{. -*c.:Yl'
-ifl61$:;;-' t)

¶43

(G. GOPTCHAND )
PRESIDING OFFICER

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Belur Ramgopal Prathyush Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Belur Ramgopal Prathyush Ram

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 Bank versus M/S. Sri Malligari Srinivas Enterprises

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Nikhil Clothing

Indian Bank versus M/S. Buidia Constructions

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Benex Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri Syed Iqbal

M S Amruthamayee Milk Products versus Union Bank of India