Allowed

Indian Bank v. Kommu Saikiran

DRT24 Aug 2023OA/74/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of a loan amount totaling approximately Rs. 43.98 lakhs, including interest and costs, against the defaulting borrower and its hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 43,98,143/- with future interest at 7.55% p.a. and costs; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendant's properties.

Indian Bank versus Kommu Saikiran — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST, ZO23

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 74 OF 2023

¶4

India Bank, Srinagar Colony Branch, H ydera bad. Rep by its Chief Manager.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Kommu Saikiran, Rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Kommu Saikiran, S/o. Kommu Yelamaiah, Aged: 33 Years, R/o. 8-3-320/1/9, Ambedkar Nagar, Near Pochamma Temple, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad-500073.

¶8

... Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : Ivlr. B, Damodar Reddy Defendant : ExparteExparte

¶10

: ExparteExparte

¶11

:: qLLEB::

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 43,98,L431- i.e. sum of Rs. 39,32,713l- and Rs. 4,65,430/- under Term Loan account and under FITL account as on 30.11.2022 from the defendant with future interest @ ,/iltv.<9

¶13

(-Y 'P

¶14

oa.No.7 412023

¶15

8.55olo and @ 7.55o/o p.a. respectively with monthly rest till the date of realisation along with costs and in default for sale of OA hypothecated vehicle.

¶16

Summons served on sole defendant, he was set exparte on 29.O3.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined tvlopuri Subba Rao, Chief Manager, as AW-1 and marked 22 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.22.

¶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 Defendant and hypothecated vehicle?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendant 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 Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.74l2023 is attowed as under: - - OW"*

¶23

oA.NO.74l2O23

¶24

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs. 43,98,t43/- i.e. sum of Rs. 39,32,7L3/_ and Rs. 4,65,430/- under Term Loan account and FITL account respectively with future interest @ 7.55o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

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

¶26

iii) the applicant bank is also entiiled to proceed against the person and propefties of defendant for realization of its dues;

¶27

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶28

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

¶29

o Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 10. Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (urfiareo t-o the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 24th day of August, 2023) .

¶30

/fu'* ({EMESHWAR KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Bank v. Kommu Saikiran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Kommu Saikiran

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

Jayalakshmi versus Bank of Baroda

Uco Bank versus M/S Asian Security and Allied Service and Ors.

Anjana Devi Goel and Anr. versus Uco Bank

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S Suraj Pharmaceiticals

State Bank of India versus M/S Ajit Kumar

State Bank of India versus Satish Kumar Jaiswal