Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mohd Muzafar Hussain

DRT27 Dec 2023OA/562/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by H.D.F.C. Bank for recovery of approximately Rs. 31.14 lakhs along with interest and costs. The court held the defendants liable based on evidence examined, permitting recovery through hypothecated vehicles and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay Rs. 31,14,112.59 with interest, allowed recovery through hypothecated vehicles, and granted costs.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mohd Muzafar Hussain — Consumer Protection | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS lHE 27Th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 562 OF 2022

¶5

H, D. F.C. Bank Ltd H.No. 1-10-60/3, 3'd Ftoor, Suryodaya Complex, Opp. Shoppers Stop, Begumpet, Hyderabad-500016 Represented by its Manager- Legal

¶6

.......... .Apptica nt.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mohd lvl uzafar Hussain

¶9

S/o. Mohd Gulam H ussain Age:46 years, Occ: Business H. No 3-1-14, Old Ramanthapur, Near D Mart, Hyderabad Tela ngana- 500013

¶10

Also at:

¶11

N4ohd Muzafa r u ussain S/o. Mohd Gulam H ussain Age:46 years; Occ: Business H.No.3-1-10, Old Ra ma nthapur, Nea r D lvla rt, Hyderabad Telanga na-500013

¶12

Aijaz Ghulam Hussain S/o. Ghulam H ussa in Age: 58 years, Occ: Business H.No.3-1-14, Old Ra mantha pur, Hyderabad, Telangana-5000 13

¶13

Also at:

¶14

Aijaz Ghulam Hussa in S/o. Ghulam H ussain Age:58 years, Occ:Business H.No. 2-51, Venkatapuram "nr...-'

¶15

oA.s52l2022

¶16

¶17

Ghatkesar, lYedchal Hydera bad, Tela ng a n a - 500088

¶18

defendants.

¶19

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. N. Suda rsha n Defendants : Exparte.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.31,14,112.59ps from the defendants with interest @9.43olo^{p.a. with} monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realisation along with costs and in default for sale of OA hypothecated vehicles.

¶22

Summons served on D1 & 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 06.03.2023, as called absent and no representation.

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined Nikhila^yedla, Manager-Legal as AW-1 and marked 6 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.6.

¶24

Learned Counsel for the appllcant bank reported orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle.

¶27

As stated supra, defendants l and 2 remained ex-parte. The Evidence Amdavit coupled with the recitals in the documents 6fu.,,o

¶28

¶29

0.A562/2022

¶30

viz., Exs. 41 to A.6 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the craim of the Appricant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶31

In the result, the present Original Application No.562/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶32

i) the defendants are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. Rs.31,14,112.59ps with future interest @9.01olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶33

ii) the applicant bank is entiiled to proceed against the hypothecated vehicle for recovery of its dues;

¶34

iii) the applicant bank is also entiHed to proceed against the person and properties of the defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶35

iv) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day of December, 2023).

¶39

61ry^**r (RAt(iESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mohd Muzafar Hussain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mohd Muzafar Hussain

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

Central Bank of India versus M/S Cosmic Retail and Ors.

Hdfc Bank versus Dharmendra Kumar

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Saha Infratech Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Sushmandi Gupta and others versus Punjab National Bank

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus v.Renuka

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Bhukya Shankar