Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mohd Aslam

DRT18 Oct 2023OA/829/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against Defendants jointly and severally for recovery of loan dues and costs, holding the bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicles and defendant properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.41,91,395.51 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicles and defendants for realisation; costs awarded.

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Mohd Aslam — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAiI1ESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.). M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application No: B2g OF 2022

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd., Having its office at # 1-10-60/3. 3'o Floor, Suryodaya Complex, Begumpet, Xyderabad-SObOr6. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory. ..,..Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mr. Mohd Aslam, S/o. Khasim Mohd, Occ: Business, Aged: 43 years, V,o.^{H. No. g-r-133/t7,Ftat No. 202,} 2no Floor, SMp Residency, Gouri Nagar, Old Bowenpally, Hyderabad, Telangana-5OOO1 1.

¶7

tvlohd Dawood, V,otH.^{No. B-t-t33/L7,FtatNo. 202,} 2no Floor, SMp Residency, Gouri Nagar, Old Bowenpally, Hyderabad, Tela ngana-5OOO 11. ... Defendants

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Srihari Bathina

¶9

Defendants : Exparte OY'""

oa.No.829/2022

:: qLLLB ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA^for the^{recoverya total} sum of Rs. 41,91,395.51ps from the^{defendantsjointly and} severally with future interest @ 9.860/o, @ 8.20olo and @ 9,25o/o p,a. towards three loan accounts from the date^of application till the date of realisation along with costs andⁱⁿ default for sale of OA hypothecated vehicles.

¶14

Summons served on D1 & 2. They were set exparte on 05.01.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶15

The Appllcant Bank examined M. Meenakshi, Legal- Manager, as AW-1 and marked 6 documents through her as Ex. A.1to Ex. A.6.

¶16

Ld. counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶17

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶18

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicles?

¶19

As stated supra. the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.6 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with fulure interest 'v\n^u/ ' "'

¶20

and costs. ' .'{6\v " '^)/

¶21

oA.NO.829/2022

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.B29l2022 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Oefendants are joinHy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.41,91,395.51ps from the defendants joinuy and severally with future interest @ 8.20olo simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶24

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

¶25

iiD the applicant bank is also entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶26

iv) the applicant bank is entiHed for the costs.

¶27

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

¶28

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordingly.

¶29

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Didated to the steno, corrected, si8ned and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 18b day of October, 2023) .

¶30

K.roD

¶31

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mohd Aslam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mohd Aslam

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

K Haris versus Idbi Bank

K Haris versus Idbi Bank

K Haris versus Idbi Bank

State Bank of India (E-State Bank Ofbikaner and Jaipur)) versus Balaji Store

Bank of Baroda versus Pannalal

Bank of India versus Mrs.Arakala Rani @ Rani Asi Reddy