Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. M/S Dynamic Cables

DRT1 Nov 2023OA/65/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by The Karur Vysya Bank Limited against the defendants for recovery of dues. The Tribunal held that the bank established its claim through witness examination and documentary evidence, ordered the defendants to pay the principal amount with interest, and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants No.1 to 3 jointly and severally directed to pay Rs.2,61,94,537.61 with interest @ 16.10% p.a. from date of application; Recovery certificate issued.

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S Dynamic Cables — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.65 of 2O23

¶4

Between:

¶5

The Karur Vysya Bank Limited, Assets recovery branch at d.No.5-B-356 to 362,3'd floor, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad - 500 001 Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applica nt

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Dynamic Cables, Rep by its Proprietor lain Hitesh

¶9

Ramesh Kumar, Sy. No.223,

¶10

Rampally village, Keesara Mandal,

¶11

Medchal- Malkajgiri dist - 501 301.

¶12

Also at: Plot no.25l8, Phase-1, IDA Cherlapally, Medchal

¶13

Malkajgiri district - 501 301.

¶14

Also at: Plot no,155/D, Phase-I, IDA Cherlapally, Ghatkesar, Medchal - Malkajgiri dist- 501 301.

¶15

Also at: D.No.1-B-50/3/LO& rt/8, Plot no.43, Sai Vatika, no.43, Sai Vatika, Sai Vatika, Vatika,^pG road, Street no.11, Sindhi colony,Sindhi colony,colony, Secunderabad - 500 003.500 003.003.

¶16

,.),. Plot no.43, Sai Vatika, no.43, Sai Vatika, Sai Vatika, Vatika,^pG road, Street no.11, Sindhi colony,Sindhi colony,colony, -jr Secunderabad - 500 003.500 003.003. 2. Mr. Jain Hitesh Ramesh Kumar @ Hitesh Ramesh Ja in (Proprietor ol not,zm :rl & Guarantor) S/o Ramesh Kumar .*.,j,! i- fut-,#

(OA.No.65/2023)^,

I il

¶21

Ottarmal^{Jain, male'} Major,^{occ: business'} -so / 3 I to&^{1 llBl} o. ft "'i-a Ftot^{no.+3, 6ai Vatika'PG road'} Stieet^{no'11,Sindhi colo-nY'} S"*nO"tabad^{- 500 003'} Also^at H. No.^{2-3 -45O, flat no' 30,3-'^ B-block'} Sri Sai^{nesiiei'liy' Gayadeenbagh'} MG road,^Nallagutta' ^ - ^ s".unOttabad^{- 500 010'} 3. J' Ramesh^{Kumar OttarmalJain'} s7o r-ut"^{Sri ottarmalJain'} Major,^{male' Occ: bus!!:tt'} o.rlo.^{r-e-50/3/10& 1UB'} Plot.43,^{Sai vatika'PG road'} Street^{no'11'Sindhi c-olo-nV'} Secunderabad^{- 5OO 003'} And^{also at:} H.No'2-3^{-45O' flat no'303'} A Olock,^{Sri Sai ResidencY'} Defendants ft:ffi3:;.:lS3l;il?':"'1?^{- soo o1o} Counsel^{for the Parties:} Sri Lanka^Jagannadham For the^APPlicant ExParte For the Defendants^for present^{OA against} 1. (RuPees^Two Rs.2161r84r537^'61Ps five^hundred Four^thousand EightY ,J (

¶22

(oA.No.6sl2023)

¶23

thirty seven and paise sixty one only) with subsequent interest @ 16.15olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶24

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant No.1 is a^proprietary concern represented by its proprietor 2nd defendant availed occ-fresh of Rs.200.00 crores and ILCfresh of Rs.200.00 crores vide sanction letter dated 30.04.2015. Defendant no.1 executed GF-5, Demand promissory note for Rs.2OO.OO crores, ILC-1 Agreement of hypothecation of book debts, FX-12, HCA-I deed of hypothecation of current assets, pA-1 etc. Defendant no.3 stood as guarantor and executed CD-11 - Agreement of guarantee. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 01.04.2018 and issued legal notice dated 11.01.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶25

Defendants 1 to 4 called absent and set exparte on 11.05.2023. 4. Shri Chamarty Srinivasa Satish, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited ,,s\tb"u\relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.l to 4\ 16. . 16. a *^{1 il0l ?ffn} l 'l [ 1tl0l?m 3:J T i. ' *oS/ 'k#

¶26

(oA.No.65/2023)

¶27

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶28

6, The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA agalnst the Defendants as prayed for?

¶29

Defendants called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.16. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs,

¶30

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶31

The Defendants No.1 to 3 are jointry and severally riabre to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2,61,94,537.6Lps (Rupees Two Crores Sixty One Lakhs Eighty Four thousand five hundred thirty seven and paise sixty one only) with subsequent interest @ L6.t,o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization ;

¶32

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no,1 firm towa rds realization{$"'o"op,,gr..' e1\ ! *ii X^{ol ilottm} lli 1.q ^.'.*9f ',fur4t'# ::.!yi'11,l.::r./

¶33

(oA.No.6sl2023)

¶34

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

¶35

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶36

Issue Recovery certificate accord ingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1.t day of Nov, 2023)

sd/_

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

.# %"*
k ^. rrntt,lllll
i o, llol luJ ;
1. . .e^:Yi
'..fuo.#1

¶43

TITL'E COPY
Dqi.r. ^"",Wb,, riYOE848Ao.

Karur Vysya Bank v. M/S Dynamic Cables

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. M/S Dynamic Cables

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Nakshatra Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Sri Chennaboina Naresh

State Bank of India, versus Sri v. Ram Mohan

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Chetana Packing Industries

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Parameshwara Industries

State Bank of India versus M/S. Rekha Automotives