Allowed

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) v. Konanki Praveen Kumar

DRT28 Aug 2023OA/983/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT allowed Union Bank of India's original application for recovery of dues from Konanki Praveen Kumar ex parte, directing payment of principal, adjusted interest, and granting sale of secured assets.

What did the court decide?

The Defendant must pay Rs. 59,79,437.98 with future interest @ 8.75% p.a. simple. The OA schedule assets are secured for realization, and the applicant can proceed against defendant's properties.

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) versus Konanki Praveen Kumar — DRT (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 983 OF 2022

¶4

Union Bank of India, (Erstwhile Corporation Bank), Beluguppa Branch, D.No. 1/39 to 1/41, Main Road, Beluguppa, Ananthapur District-515741. Rep by its Authorized Officer.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Konanki Praveen Kumar, S/o. Venkata Naidu, Aged: Major, Occ: Cultivation R/o. Thagguparthy Village, Belluguppa, Ananthapur District-515741.

¶8

.,.Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s V. Dyumanj Defendants ; Exparte

¶10

:: ORDER::

¶11

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a total sum of Rs. 59,79,437.98ps i.e. a sum of Rs. 8,07,036.00ps under AGTL-I account, Rs. 45,30,751.00ps 44",.At*,2^

¶12

oa.No,983/2022

¶13

under AGTL-U account, Rs. 6,15,104.25ps under AGTL_III account and Rs. 26,546.73ps under AGTL_IV account respectively from the defendant with future interest @ 17.45o/o p.a. with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realisation along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule assets.

¶14

Summons served on sole defendant, was set exparte on 76.03.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶15

The Applicant Bank examined N. Nagaraju, Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 38 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.38.

¶16

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

¶17

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶18

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA schedute assefs?

¶19

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.38 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. Nu"

¶20

oa.No.983/2022

¶21

In the result, the present Original Application No.983/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶22

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 59,79,437.98ps i.e. a sum of Rs. 8,07,036.00ps under AGTL_I account, Rs. 45,30,751.00ps under AGTL_II account, Rs. 6,15,104.25ps under AGTL_III account and Rs. 26,546_73ps under AGTL_IV account respectively with future interest @ 8.75olo simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶23

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation/mortgage of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debu

¶24

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

¶25

vi) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶26

oA.NO.983/2022

¶27

¶28

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

¶29

q Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno. correded, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 286 dayofAugust, 2023).

¶31

SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) v. Konanki Praveen Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) v. Konanki Praveen Kumar

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

Punjab National Bank versus Maa Fly- Ash Bricks Industries and Others

Canara Bank versus M/s Vishwa Faishon And General Store and Others

Shreejan Cold Storage Private Limited versus Uco Bank

Sh Samarth Singh Hooda versus State Bank of India

Punjab National Bank versus Manoj Kumar Singh and others

Hdfc Bank versus P Veera Brahmaiah