Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank Limited v. Moon Star Fried Gram Mill

DRT17 Nov 2023OA/573/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-II at Hyderabad allowed the Bank's Original Application for recovery of a substantial sum against two respondents who remained in default, holding them jointly liable despite partial auction proceeds received.

What did the court decide?

Defendants held jointly and severally liable to pay outstanding balance of Rs.1,51,15,489.65 (post-auction adjustment) with future interest and costs. Recovery certificate issued.

Karur Vysya Bank Limited versus Moon Star Fried Gram Mill — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-IIAT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE^{17th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR^{KOTHE, B.COM.,L.LB.(HONS.),M.A.} PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶3

Original Application^{No: 573 OF 2022}

¶4

The Karur^{VYsYa BankLimited,} D. No. 5-8-356^{to 362,} Third Floor,^{ChiragAli Lane,} Abids, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Chief^Manager.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Moon Star^{Fried GramMill,} ReP. bY Sole^ProPrietor Smt. KorraPati^Noorjahan, S.75l1, Prakash^Nagar, Kottaralle Panchyat, Poddatu r- 516360,^{KadaPa Dist.}

¶8

Sri. K. Mahaboob Basha, S/o. K. Ahmed Hussain, Aged: Major, Occ:^Business, Kompala Pullana Street, Poddatu r- 516360,^Kadapa Dist.

¶9

'..Defendants

¶10

: l'4r. CH. T. Sreerama l4urty Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: Exparte OY.n

oA.NO,s73l2022

:: ORDER:;

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.1,51,15,489.65ps from the defendants joinuy and severally with subsequent interest @ t2.25o/o p.a. with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 3olo p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶16

The defendants were set exparte on O4.O7,2O23 as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Chamarty Srinivasa Satish, Asset Recovery Manager, as AW-1 and matked 22 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.22.

¶18

It is stated that pending OA schedule property 1 & 2 was auctioned under SARFAESI Act at Rs. 66,55,000/(Rs.43,50,000/- and Rs.23,05,000/- from the sale of Schedule Properties 1 & 2) and sale proceeds adjusted to loan account on 14.06.2022.

¶19

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank stated that orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the balance claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule^properties? dY-o

¶22

oa.No.s73l2o22

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.22 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.573l2022 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.1,51,15,489.65ps (-) Rs.66.55,000/appropriated to loan account on 07.L2.2O2L with future interest @ 12.25olo simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of^properties described in the schedules annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitle to proceed against the same realise its balance debit;

¶27

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

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs. Aytgz ^,^ //y'.'.-.,t-,\t"' '/

¶29

oA.NO.S73l2022

¶30

9, The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of recelpt of this Order,

¶31

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned, (Dictated to the steno, aorrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17s day of November,2023).

¶33

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karur Vysya Bank Limited v. Moon Star Fried Gram Mill

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank Limited v. Moon Star Fried Gram Mill

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

Punjab National Bank versus M S Sreemanta Marketing

Icici Bank Limited versus Murali Raju

Ms Sms Green Tech Enterprises versus Bank of Baroda

Naresh Ramtirth Yadav versus Punjab National Bank

Yes Bank Limited versus Chapala Ravi

Karur Vysya Bank Limited versus Bharath Fried Gram Mill