Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Maroju Chandrashekar

DRT19 Jul 2023OA/816/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Debt Recovery Tribunal-II Hyderabad, the Presiding Officer allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for the recovery of a principal sum of Rs. 21,39,204.55 along with future interest and costs against a defendant who appeared ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed the Original Application; directed the Defendant to pay Rs. 21,39,204.55 with future interest @ 10.50% p.a., costs, and issued a Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank versus Maroju Chandrashekar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE 19th DAY OF JULY,2023}

¶2

PRESENT: SH.^{RAMESHWAR KOTHE,B.COM.,L.LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application^{No: 816 OF 2022}

¶4

HDFC Bank^Ltd., Having its office at^1-10-60/3, 3rd Floor,^{Suryodaya ComPlex,} Opposite ShoPPers^StoP, Begumpet,^{SecunderabadMandal,} Hyderabad-500016. Represented^{bY its} Legal Manager.

¶5

...Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr.Maroju Chandrashekar S/o Narayana^Maroiu Age 44 Years, Occ: Private^EmPloyee, R/o Flat No.306, III^floor, SV Constructions,^{Venkateswaran,} Peerzadiguda,^{Medchal Malkajgirl,} Hyderabad, tela^{ngana- 500098.}

¶8

Also at:Mr.Maroju Chandrashekar, S/o Narayana^Maroju, Age 44 Years, Occ: Private^Employee, C/o NaraYana^{Educational Society,} Kuntloor Hayath^Nagar, 4 & 5, Prabakar^Building, Hyderabad, Telangana-501505.

¶9

Also at:Mr.Maroju Chandrashekar, S/o Narayana Maroju, Age 44 years, ArV^g [/ '..u*-

¶10

¶11

OA.No.816/2022

¶12

Occ: Private Employee, H.No.4, Maddira la, Nuthankal l"laddirala, Nalgonda, Tela n ga na - 508280.

¶13

... -.. Defendant

¶14

Counsel for the Applicant

M.V.Kini

Defen da nts

Ex pa rte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.21,39,204.55ps from the defendant with future interest @ 24olo p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realisation a long with costs.

¶20

Summon served on sole defendant and was set exparte on

¶21

06.01.2023 as ca lled absent and no representation.

¶22

The Applicant Bank examined Kulkarni Akshay Kumar, Manager as AW-1 and marked 05 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.5.

¶23

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

¶24

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶25

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?

¶26

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to Y**

¶27

OA.No.816/2022

¶28

A5 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.

¶29

In the result, the present Original Application No.816/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶30

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.21,39,204.55ps with future interest @ 10.50% p.a. simple, from the date of application ti the date of rea lization;

¶31

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendant for realization of its dues;

¶32

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶35

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on thisthe 1gth dayofJuly,2023).

¶36

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank v. Maroju Chandrashekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Maroju Chandrashekar

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

Uco Bank versus Sri Neiphrelie Mechulho

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Sandrembi Foods Products

Canara Bank versus M S Krishna Eco Solutions

Mr Ashra versus Bharat Cooperative Bank Mumbai Limited

Mr Ashraf versus Bharat Cooperative Bank Mumbai Limited

M/S Wani Enterprises versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited