Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Alupula Prasanna

DRT8 Dec 2023OA/658/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, the Tribunal allowed an original application by ICICI Bank Limited against three defendants. The Bank claimed recovery of arrears with interest and costs. The defendants did not appear. The adjudicating officer held that the evidence affidavit and documents established the liability.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.31,87,138/- with future interest; applicant bank entitled to proceed against the hypohetated vehicle and properties of defendants.

Icici Bank Limited versus Alupula Prasanna — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 658 OF 2023

¶4

ICICI Bank Limited, Gachibowli, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Power of Attorney Holder. .....Applicant.

¶5

Versus
1,AlupulaPrasanna, D/o.Peedi RajaiahAlupula, Aged:38 Years,R/o.^plotNo.201, Sri Balaji Nivas,Medipally, l.4aruthi Nagar,TulpiHotel OppKhamma,Hyderabad, Telangana-500098.
2.Perumala Rameswaraiah, S/o.PerumalaAyyanna, Aged: 40Years,R/o.Plot No.201, SriBalaji SeethammaNilayam, lvledipally,MaruthiNagar, Tulpi HotelOpp Khamma, Hyderabad, Telangana-500098.
3,KatamRangaswamy, S/o.KatamSayanna,
Aged: 45Yearc,R/o.2-62, Somasila,Malleswarama,
14ahaboobnagar,Telangana-509105.	...Defendants

¶6

Counsel for the Applicant Defendants

¶7

lYr. B. Ravindra Reddy

Exparte

oA.NO.658/202t

::^qLD-LB ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^{present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.31,87,138/- as^{on 02.O2.2023fromthe defendants} jointly and severally with future interest @ 240lo^p.a. compounded monthly^{restsfrom 03.02.2023till the date of} realization along with costs.

¶13

summons served on D1 and 2^{returned withendorsement} "Refused" hence, deemed to be^{served, whereassummons} served on D3. All the^{defendantswere set exparteon} 09.10,2023 as called^{absentand no representation.}

¶14

The Applicant Bank examined N.^{Chandrasekar,Regional} Relationship Manager, as^AW-1 and^{marked15 documents} through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex.^A.15

¶15

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant^{Bank reportedorders may be} passed through merits. Perused the material^placed on^record.

¶16

The point that arises for consideration^is:-

¶17

whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶18

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte.^The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.15 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 ilterest and costs. 7fiwY ^u /_.,/^.-\x,'

¶19

oA.NO.558/2023

¶20

to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶21

In the result, the^present Original Application No.658/2023 is allowed as under: -

¶22

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.31,87,138/- with future interest @ 71.75o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶23

ii) the oA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same realise its debu

¶24

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

¶25

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶26

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

¶27

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordingly.

¶28

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. {Dictated to the^{steno,corr€cted,signed andpronouncedbymein the open counon} this the 8s Day of December,2023). M

¶29

PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Alupula Prasanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Alupula Prasanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uco Bank versus Messers Royal Food and Beverages

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mrs Sheela W/O Sanjay Sharma

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Panchsheel Distributor and others

Bank of Baroda versus Late M Chandra Kala Reddy

Icici Bank Limited versus Jaffar Hussian

Canara Bank versus Ms Shree Sai Industries and Others