Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/S. Mamatha Enterprises

DRT18 Dec 2024OA/104/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Indian Bank against a firm and its proprietor for recovery of a loan account classified as NPA, amounting to Rs. 44,44,176/- with future interest at 16.25% p.a., after the defendants remained in ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 44,44,176/- with future interest @ 16.25% p.a. and costs; recovery certificate issued.

Indian Bank versus M/S. Mamatha Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER' 2c.24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶3

OA,No.1O4 ol 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Indian Bank,

¶6

Hanmakonda 100 ft Road branch, TV tower colony, beside SpR school, Hanmakonda - 506 001. Represented by its authorized officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Mamatha Enterprises, Prop : MrsAluriMamatha, W/o Mr. AluriVeeraSwamy, No.32-3-248, Durganagar Road no.3, Bheemaram, Hanmakonda - 506 001.

¶10

Also at:

¶11

No.2-1 18, village Sadireddypaili, Kothagudamandal, Mahabubabad - 506 135.

¶12

Mrs.AluriMamatha,

¶13

w/o Mr. AluriVeeraSwamy,

¶14

major,^prop: Mamatha Enterprises, N0.32-3-248, Durganagar Road no.3, Bheemaram, Hanmakonda - 506 OO1.

¶15

Also at:

¶16

0EC 2ll?r

¶17

No.2-1 18, viilage Sadireddypalti, Kothag uda ma nda l, Mahabubabad - 506 135.

¶18

Counsel for the^parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Sri R.V. Subba Rao

Exparte

(OA. No.104/2024)

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.44,44,L76l- (Rupees Forty Four Lakhs Forty four thousand One hundred and Seventy Six only) with future interest @ 16.25% p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization.

¶26

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.2 is the proprietor of defendant no.1 firm avaired term loan of Rs.30,97,000/-, clean OD facility of Rs.1.00 lakh and bank guarantee facirity of Rs.4.00 rakhs on 18.01.2019. The defendant arso avaired GECLS term roan of Rs.5.00 rakhs on 05.06.2020 and GECLS 1.0 extension limit of Rs.4,50,000/- on 07.12.202L and executed various necessary documents. After avairing the roan facirities, 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 crear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶27

J. set exparte on 78.06.2024. 1B^OECMT

¶28

(oA. No.104/2024)

¶29

Sri N. Kiran Kumar, Asst. Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.31.

¶30

5, Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶31

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶32

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.31. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶33

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.44,44,176l- (Rupees Forty Four Lakhs Forty four thousand One hundred and Seventy Six only)

¶34

with 1 futefuturerN{rterest @ 76.25o/o p.a from date of application till the date of rea li

¶35

18 0ECm

¶36

(oA.No.104 /2024)

¶37

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

The Applicant Bank is entiiled to the costs of the oA.

¶39

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶40

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶41

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶42

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1B,h day of Dec,2024)

¶43

sd/ - (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶44

"/;'
,,*'" "
z6i
iP
r
10 oEcmt

¶45

TRT'E^COPY

¶46

AlrL^Rcglsfrar NI{T.T,^ITYDEFJ'.F "

Indian Bank v. M/S. Mamatha Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/S. Mamatha Enterprises

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Sri Muggu Kumar

Indusind Bank Limited versus Radhika

M/S . Uco Bank versus M/S. Vanitha Jyothi Mahila Sangam

Mrs D Umadevi versus Aptus Value Housing Finance India Ltd.

City Union Bank Limited versus Sri Sugyam Vittal

City Union Bank Limited versus Avanthi Agro Agencies