Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Aditya Industries

DRT4 May 2023OA/701/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 2,39,44,274.06 plus interest from five defendants who remained ex-parte. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the dues and allowed the bank to proceed against secured and unsecured assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to jointly and severally pay Rs. 2,39,44,274.06 with interest; bank entitled to proceed against secured and unsecured assets; recovery certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank versus Aditya Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶2

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

¶3

oA. NO.701 0F 2022

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd. Department for Special Operations Hyderabad, H. No. 6-3-246 and 6-3-244/A,3'd Floor, Desk No.O196 Roxana Palladium, Road No. 1 Banjara Hills, (Beside Virinchi Hospital) Hyderabad - 500 034, Hyderabad Dist. Rep. by its Senior Manager.

¶5

....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Aditya Industries Rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Bandarupally Chencha Rao H. No. 2-292/4 Opp: Grain Market Nekkonda, Warangal Dist. Telangana State - 506 t22.

¶8

Mr. Bandarupally Chencha Rao S/o Bandarupallly Brahmaiah Age: 57 years, Occ: Business H. No. 1-47, Narsampet Road Nekkonda, Warangal Dist, Telangana State - 506 122.

¶9

? Mrs. Bandarupally Varalaxmi S/o Kothapalli Punnaiah Age: 51 years, Occ: Business H. No. 1-47, Narsampet Road Nekkonda, Warangal Dist. Telangana State - 506 I22.

¶10

/w*

¶11

oA.7OLl2022

¶12

Mrs. BandaruPallY^{DivYa Sri} D/o Chencha Rao Age: 33^{years, Occ: Business} H. No. 1-47,^{NarsamPetRoad} Nekkonda, Warangal^Dist. Telangana State -^{506 122.}

¶13

M/s. Durga Cotton^Industries Rep. by Mrs. Bandarupally^DivyaSri 1-1l8, Sy. No. 40/A,^{D/o Chencha Rao,} Age: 33^{years, Occ: Business} Narsampet Road,^Nekkonda, Warangal Dist.^{TelanganaState-506 122.} ..... Defendants.

¶14

Counsel for the^APP|lcant : M.V. Kini. Defendants :Exparte.

¶15

:: ORDER^::

¶16

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recovery of a} sum of Rs.2,3g,44,274.06Ps^{towardsloan account Nos'502-} 00030168323 and^{9930242 from the Defendantsand their} properties jointly and severally^{with future interest@18o/oP'a'} from the date of^{filing of the Application till the date of} realisation along^{with costs and sale of OA schedule assets'}

¶17

The Summons of defendant^{1 to 3 returnedwith remarksas} "Refused", hence deemed^{to be served'Defendants4 and 5} served with summons.^{All the Defendants were set exparte on} 17.0t.2023 as called^{absentand no representation'}

¶18

The Applicant^{Bank examinedSrikanth Sukhavasi,Manageras} AW-1 and marked^{44 documents through him as Ex' A'1 to Ex'} A44. AWn

¶19

oA.707/2022

¶20

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

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule properties as prayed for?

¶23

6 As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.44 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.7Ot/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.z,39,44,274.06Ps towards loan account Nos.50200030168323 and 9930242 atong with interest @72o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation/mortgage of assets described in the schedules annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its drues; /wn

¶27

oA.7OuZO22

¶28

iii) the Applicant^{Bank is also entitled to proceed} against the^{person and properties of} defendants^{for realization of its dues;and}

¶29

iv) the Applicant^{Bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶30

B. The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the^{date of receipt of this order'}

¶31

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly'} 10. Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} 1Oi.t.,"a^{to the steno, corrected,signed andpronouncedbyme in the open courton} this the 4th^{daYof MaY,2023).}

¶32

r/w*

¶33

Mll.s*woR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank v. Aditya Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Aditya Industries

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

State Bank of India versus Pritesh Jangade

Hdfc Bank versus Sukhvinder Kaur

Yesuratnam Venktepaaka versus Rbl Bank Limited

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sai Deethya Bikes India Pvt. Ltd.

Mosomat Sita Rani Sinha versus Bank of India

Canara Bank versus Onkar Singh