Allowed

Idbi Bank Limited v. M/S . Trr Agencies

DRT16 Aug 2023OA/81/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Outstanding money claim filed by IDBI Bank Ltd. against TRR Agencies and guarantors in repayment of loan and discharge of mortgage. Bank established claim via official examination. Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed application, ordering joint and several liability for payment with interest and right to enforce security. Recovery certificate issued.

What did the court decide?

Director Defendants to pay Rs. 27,42,560.00 with interest at 18% p.a. Bank entitled to sell mortgaged property and proceed against joint personal properties for realization. Costs awarded to Applicant

Idbi Bank Limited versus M/S . Trr Agencies — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.81 of 2OZg

¶3

Between :

¶4

IDBI Bank Limited, Branch office at H.No.1-5-91/2& 90/3, New Town, Mahaboobnagar Telangana state - 509 OO1. Represe_nted by its power of Attorney Holder Sri K. Venkata Krishnaiah

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. TRR Agencies, Represented by its proprietor Mr. T. Ravinder Reddy,

¶8

H.. No. 1 - 10-76/4, Shashabgutta,

¶9

Mahaboobnagar - 509 001.

¶10

Mr. T. Ravinder Reddy, S/o Late T. Raghuma Reddy, Aged about 44 years, occ: business, Proprietor of M/s. TRR Agencies, H,.No. 1-10-7614, Shashabgutta, Mahaboobnagar - 509 001.

¶11

Smt Talasani padmamma, w/o Late T. Raghuma Reddy, a.ged about 70 years, occ: household, H.No. 1-10-7614, Shashabgutta, Mahaboobnagar - 509 001.

¶12

(o A.81,/20231

¶13

Mr. T. Ramesh Reddy, s/o Late T. Raghuma Reddy, ag^ed about_46 years, occ: business, H.No. 1-10-7614, Shashabgutta, Mahaboobnagar - 509 001.

¶14

Smt Talasani Shirisha Reddy, w/o K. Ravi Kumar reddy, :,s":9 ?b9lt_3-6^{years, occ:housewife,} H.No. 1- 10-76/4, Shashabgutta, Mahaboobnagar - 509 001.

¶15

Defendants

¶16

Counsel for the parties:

¶17

For the Applicant Sri V. Suresh Kumar For the Defendants Exparte

¶18

ORDER

¶19

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.27,42,S6O.Ogps (Rupees Twenty Seven lakhs Forty two thousand Five hundred Sixty and paise eight only) with future interest @ 18% p.a from date of filing of apprication tirr rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged immovable property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶20

-;.---"^{'- --._}

¶21

As per the averments in tfre ao;fi'ajtin;.;.; pplicant Bank states that

¶22

the defendant No.1 repres.",". ,X+;";3; .2 availed cash credit

¶23

a- ', leAt]620n :. :i;....;. .Li.-i ,;'io *"{:.iS 'QlwitiP

¶24

(o A.81,/20231

¶25

facility of Rs'17.00 rakhs vide sanction retter dated 24.r0.20L4. Defendants 1& 2 executed necessary roan documents i.e,, facirity agreement, hypothecation cum loan agreement dated 24.10.2OI4. Defendants 2 to 5 stood as guarantors and executed common guarantee deed dated 24.10.20L4. Defendants No.2 to 5 created charge over the immovabre property as described in the schedure to oA. subsequentry the cash credit facirity of Rs.17.00 rakhs was enhanced to Rs.27.00 lakhs and executed demand promissory note dated 04.01.2016 for Rs.27.00 lakhs. Later on request from defendants, the Appricant bank reviewed and revised the cash credit from Rs.27,00 lakhs to Rs.25.30 lakhs and from Rs.25.30 lakhs to Rs'24'30 rakhs vide retter dated 19.05.2020, After avairing the roan facirity' the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA and issued notices. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶26

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 05.07.2023.

¶27

Shri Abhishek Naini, AGM of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 toA.27. .,1..'-i'i&=_,,,.

¶28

¶29

(oA.81,/2023)

¶30

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶31

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as

¶32

prayed for?

¶33

The defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1 who is the official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.27. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against thq Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entired to recover the craim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶34

In the result, the present oA is alowed with costs, as under:

¶35

The Defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total Rs.27,42,56O.Ogps (Rupees Twenty Seven takhs Forty two thousand Five hundred Sixty and paise eight only) with future interest @ 18o/o p.a from date of filing till the date of realization.

¶36

i) The Appricant bank is entired to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in to OA towards realization of

¶37

its dues.

¶38

loA.8L/2023)

¶39

ii) the Applicant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 5 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶40

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

¶41

iv) The Applicant shafl fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶42

10, Issue Recovery certificate accord ingly.

¶43

Communicate a copy of the order to the pa rties concerned.

¶44

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by h,er, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16th day of Aug, 2023)

¶45

sd/-

¶46

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶47

.Nffi
*, 16 filj6208
il

¶48

TRt,ECOPY
^-* ^rrr.ffi&', ! ,rfs,t.qBlD.

Idbi Bank Limited v. M/S . Trr Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank Limited v. M/S . Trr Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Smt. Anishetty Hymavathi

Union Bank of India versus M S Rohit Electronics and Home Appilances

Manne Narsimulu versus Canara Bank

Union Bank of India versus Rohit Kumar

Indian Overseas Bank versus Ms Abi Industry

State Bank of India versus Sri Potta Bhikshapathi