Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Chennamaneni Padmaja

DRT25 May 2023OA/795/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Punjab National Bank to recover Rs. 70,72,762.68 along with future interest and costs from the defendants, holding them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.70,72,762.68 with future interest; mortgage property encumbered; recovery certificate issued.

Punjab National Bank versus Chennamaneni Padmaja — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS^{THE25thDAYOF MAY,2023}

¶2

PRESENT: sH. RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE,B.Com., L LB (Hons )' M'A} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application^{No: 795 OF ZOZ2}

¶4

PUNJAB^{NATIONALBANK,} Circle SASTRA^HYderabad Plot No.03,^{RegencyPlaza,} Ground^{Floor,MaitriviharArea Ameerpet,} Hvderabad- 500038. Represented bY^{its Chief Manager'}

¶5

. , ...Applica^nt.

¶6

Versus

¶7

lvl rs. Chen^{n a ma nen i Padmaja} W/o Sridhar^{Rao,Aged about37 Years,} occ: Business,^{H.No.1-4-881/4/3,} SBH Colony,^{New Bakaram Devi Chowk,} Gandhi^{nagar, Hyderabad-500080.}

¶8

... Defendant

¶9

Counsel for^{the APP|icant} Defenda nts

¶10

Mr. N.V.Subba^Raju Exparte

¶11

::^{gLLqB ::}

¶12

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a} sum of Rs.70,72,762^{6aps from the defendants jointly and} severally wlth future^{interest@ 8.50o/o p'a' with monthlyrests} along with^{2o/o pendl interestfrom 30} '09.2022^{till the date of} reallsation along with^{costs,and in default, for sale of OA} schedule^property. N-

¶13

¶14

oa.79512022

¶15

The defendant served with sun exparte on 23'02'2023

¶16

as carred absent and ,"."r.".]Xli,"iet

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined o t t''u Dasan, chief Manager,

¶18

as AW-1 and marked 12 oo.r, Tents through her as Ex. A.1 to

¶19

Ex. A.12.

¶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 enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the craim of the Appricant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are join y and severally ljable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.795l2022 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.70,72,762.68ps @ 9.20olo p.a with future interest simple from the date of application tilt the date of reatization; /Wr,

¶26

oA.795l2OZ2

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs,

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th day of May, 2023)^.

¶33

Ow* (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Punjab National Bank v. Chennamaneni Padmaja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Chennamaneni Padmaja

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

Mohammed Ali M K versus Federal Bank

Shafi Adattil versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Prabir Kumar Roy versus Union Bank of India

Idbi Bank versus Sahasr Home Appliances

Union Bank of India versus Sona Fashions

Idbi Bank versus Sawant Namdeo Pandurang