Partly allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sri Manjuntha Enterprises

DRT24 May 2023OA/57/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's recovery application. It held that defendants are liable for the balance due after deducting proceeds from the sale of a hypothecated vehicle, allowing recovery of the difference plus interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay balance of Rs. 27,84,469.40/- less realized amount, with future interest and costs; Recovery Certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sri Manjuntha Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

]N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 24Th DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), tvl.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application No:57 OF 2O22

¶4

HDFC BanK Ltd., Having its office at 1-10-60/3, 3t" floor, Suryodaya Complex, Begumpet, Hyderabad-500016. Represented by its authorized Sri.V.V.Pavan Kumar.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s.Sri Majunatha Enterprises, Having its Omce at D.No.5751575, Kothaguda X Road, Kandukur Village, Peddapalli-501359 Represented by its^proprietor G.Mahesh

¶8

Mr.Gujjala Mahesh S/o G.Ashanna

¶9

Aged abcut 28 years, Occ:^proprietor Of M/s Sri. Majunatha Enterprises, R/o.H.No. 1-107/1, Cheepunuthata, Talakoda pa lle, Ma habubnagar-S09321.

¶10

Also at:

¶11

l'4r. Gujjala Mahesh R/o D.No. 575157s, Kothaguda X Road, Kandukur Viltage, Peddapalli-501359

¶12

Mr.Vannam Srisailam, S/o V.Narsimlu, Aged about 33 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.5-35, Kothaguda X Road, Kandukur Village, Peddapalli-501359.

/ry:"u

oa.s712022

... Defendants

counsel for the^APP|icant : Mr. M.Srinivas^Reddy Defendants : Exparte

¶17

::^qLLEB::

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed^{the present OA for the recoveryof a} sum of Rs.27,84,469.40ps^{from the defendants jointly and} severally with^{future interest @ 18% p.a. with quarterly} interest from date^{of application till the date of realisationalong} with costs, andⁱⁿ default,^{for saleof OA schedule Assets'}

¶19

The defendants served with^{summonsthroughpaper} publication, they are set exparte on^{L2.09.2O22as called} absent and^{no representation.}

¶20

The Applicant Bank^{examined V V.Pavan Kumar, Legal} N4anager, as AW-1 and^{marked 8 documents throughher as Ex'} A.1 to Ex. A.8. It is submitted^{that the hypothecatedOA} schedule vehicle^{was sold and Rs.14,40,728/-was adjusted to} loa n account on 31.03.2023.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the^{Applicant Bank and perused the} material^placed on record.

¶22

The^point that arises^{for consideration is:-}

¶23

whether the Applicant Bank^{is entitled} for the claim made in the OA^against the Defendants?

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte.^The Evidence Amdavit coupled with the recitals in the^documents ,zlntya.r."

/ ././ '.nr:,

_-,.

oA.5712022

viz., Exs. A.1 to A.B marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim (-) Rs.14,40,728/_ of the Appticant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hord that the Defendants are jointly and severaily riabre to pay the barance oA craim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶30

In the result, the present Original Application No.57/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶31

i) The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.27,84,469.40ps (-) Rs.t4,4O,72B/_ realized as on 31.03.2023 by sale of hypothecated OA schedule vehicle with future interest @ 11.60% p.a simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its balance dues;

¶33

iii) the applicant bank is entitled For the costs.

¶34

8, The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

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 24th day of May, 2023) .

¶37

lrwww -. ide'tt* MESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sri Manjuntha Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sri Manjuntha Enterprises

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

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Rajveer Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Meena Begum

Uco Bank versus M/S Nagar Foot Art Private Limited

Yes Bank versus Bontha Yadaiah

Hdfc Bank versus Swathi Muthyala

Yes Bank versus Deepak Kumar Mishra