Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Sai Durga Industries

DRT22 Sept 2023OA/645/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's recovery application against the defendants for outstanding loan amounts, declaring them jointly and severally liable and permitting realization from hypothecated assets and properties, with future interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 47,54,847.68 with interest; OA claim secured by hypothecated assets; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Canara Bank versus M/S Sai Durga Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 22"d DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KoTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

original Application No: 645 OF 2022

¶4

Canara Bank, Sainikpuri Branch, Secunderabad Represented by its Manager.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Sai Durga Industries, Rep. by its Managing Partner Plot No. 178lF/12, Survey No.125, Phase-II, Road No. 19 and 22, IDA Mallapur, Hyderabad-500076.

¶8

And Also at:

¶9

Plot No. 23, Shed No.36, Phase-II, Cherlapally, Hyderabad -500051.

¶10

Shri Kollati Venkata Raju S/o. Sri Venkata Raju, Aged: Major, Occ: Business, H.No.4-7-5l5, Raghavendra Nagar Nacharam, Hyderabad-500076

¶11

..Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. T. Nagender Defendants : Exparte N*

¶13

oA.NO.545/2022

¶14

:; (LB-D-ER ::

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.47,54,847.68ps i.e. a sum of Rs. 41,16,564.68ps under OCC Loan, Rs. 2,8O,76U- under Term Loan-I and Rs. 3,54,122/- under Term Loan-II from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @ !3.7Oo/o, @ 12.55o/o and @ L2.3Oo/o p.a. from 01.08.2022 till the date of realization along with costs and default for sale of OA hypothecation assets.

¶16

The defendants were set exparte on 13.03.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined G. Arvind Kumar, Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 33 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.33.

¶18

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

¶19

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assets?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.33 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. N"*

¶22

oA.NO.645/2022

¶23

In the^{result, the present Original ApplicationNo'645/2o22is} allo,ved as under:^-

¶24

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^{pay to the ApplicantBanka sum of} Rs.47,54,847.68Ps i'e^{asum ofRs'} 41,16,564.68Ps^{under OCC Loan,Rs'} 2,81,76ft- under^{Term Loan-I and Rs'} 3,5A,122/-^{under Term Loan-II with future} interest @ 9.65010^{simple from the date of} application till^{the date of realization;}

¶25

ii) the OA claim^{issecured bY waY of} hypothecation of^{assets described in the} schedule annexed to^{the OA and the} applicant bank^{is entitledto proceed against} the same to realise^{its balancedebt;}

¶26

ili) the applicant bank^{is entitled to proceed} against the^{person and propertiesof} defendants for realization^{of its dues;}

¶27

iv) the applicant^{bank is entitled for the costs.}

¶28

The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file Cost lvlemowithin 2 weeks} from the date of receipt^{of this Order.}

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate^accordingly.

¶30

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the partiesconcerned.} (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and^pronounced by^mein the^{open courton} thisthe 22"d day of September,^2023).

¶31

5"P ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. M/S Sai Durga Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Sai Durga Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus Messers Hoque Supary Chips Unit

Ms Manglam Automobiles versus Uco Bank

State Bank of India versus Mr Shivavtar Pritvipal Kaythal

M/S Rajindera Auto Services versus Indusind Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Labh Singh

Yes Bank versus Hafijul Purkait and Anr.