Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S.Lampex Electronics Limited

DRT26 Dec 2024OA/110/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues amounting to Rs.8,53,18,032.58 from consortium borrowers and guarantors, directing issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Declarations of liability to pay Rs.8.53 crore along with future interest; security of mortgage properties; entitlement to proceed against persons and properties for realization; grant of costs; direc

Union Bank of India versus M/S.Lampex Electronics… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II^{AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF^{DECEMBER,2O?4}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE,^{B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), lvl.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO, IIO OF²⁰²⁴

¶4

Union Bank of India R.P, Road Bra nch Buglow No.109 New No. 1-7-252 to 254 Oxford Street, Sarojini^DeviRoad Near Pa rklane Centre Secunderabad-500003. Rep. by its Authorised Officer.

¶5

.......Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1, M/s. Lampex Electronics Limited Rep by its lvlanaging Director Reglstered Office 6- 2- 237 /^B Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500 072.

¶8

1. Sri Shiva Prasad Nidamarthy S/o Late Susheel Kumar^Nidamarthi Ivlanag ing Director of Iv1ls. Lampex Electronics Limited Aged about 54^years, Occ: Business H. N.6-2-231l8, Vlvek Naga^r Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500 072.

¶9

1. Smt. Nidamarthy l,4aha Lakshmi W/o Sri Shiva Prasad Nidamarthy Age: Major, Occ: Business H. N.6-2-231l8, Vivek Nagar Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500^072.

¶10

1. Smt. Nidamarthy Hima Gouri D/o late Susheel Kumar^Nidamarthi Age: Major, Occ: Business H. N. 6-2-231l8, Vivek Nagar Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500 012 ,..** -.....

¶11

o a.1,1012024

¶12

Sri Yadlapally Pardha Saradhi S/o RYC Sekhar, A9e: l4ajor Occ: Business, Plot No.22 H. No. 1-4- 180/22 Saiba ba Colony, Sainikpu ri Kapra, H ydera ba d^- 500094.

¶13

Sri Sivanand Nida ma rthi S/o late Susheel Kumar Nidamarthi Age: Major, Occ: Business C/o H. N. 6-2-23118, Vivek Nagar Kukatpally, Hyderabad- 500 072.

¶14

State Bank of India I. E. Sa nath nagar Branch 7^-2-C/ 47 A, Industrial Estate Sanathnagar, Hyderabad-18 Rep by its Authorised OFficer.

¶15

...... Defendants.

¶16

Counsel for the Applica nt Defendants 1to 6

¶17

Counsel for Defendant No.7

¶18

Mr. V. Sethu lYadhava Rao. Expa rte.

¶19

Mr. C. Prabha ka r.

¶20

:: CL.rLD-LR ::

¶21

The Applicant Bank flled the present OA u/s 19 of The Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of a total sum of Rs.8,53,18,032.57Ps (Rs.94,66,122.3oPs under UGECL Account and Rs.7,58,51,910.27Ps under Cash Credit Account with future interest @9.50o/o and 14.600/o p.a. respectively) from defendants 1 to 5 jointly and severally and to the extent of estate of late Susheel Kumar Nidamarthy in the hands of 6th defendant with monthly rests from the date of OA till the date of realisation along with costs and sale of OA schedule assets.

¶22

The averments of applicant bank as per the OA, briefly, are that 1't defendant is the borrower, defendants 2 to 5, father of 6th

¶23

ff^"'r

¶24

oa.17O12024

¶25

defendant^i.e ,^{late SusheelKumarNidamarthiare the} guarantors/mortgagors^{and 7th defendantls the co-lender/lead} bank of^{the consortiumDefendants1 to 5 and lateSusheel} Kumar Nidamarthl^{executedrequisite loan documents towards} the loans/renewal^{limitsfrom time to time and deposited} originaltitledeedsbelongingtotheirrespectivepropertiesWith the 7th defendant^{bank Due to default in repayment'loan} account^{becameNPA.DefendantNo'7 has flled oA 899/2023} separately^{for recovery of its dues extended under consortium} arrangement.^{The presentOA is filedFor recovery of dues} relating^{to the aPPlicant bank'}

¶26

Defendants^{1 to 5 were set expartevidedocketorderdated} 24.06.2024^{for non-representation desplte summons'}

¶27

Defendant^{No.7 filed written statement averring that it hasno} objection^{towards the OA subject to its rights'}

¶28

Applicant^{Bank examined S Anirudh, Senior Manager'as AW-1} and marked^{15 documentsthrough himas Ex A l to Ex A 15'}

¶29

Learned^{counsel appearing for the applicant bank prayed that} orders may^{be passed based on recordsWhereas' learned} counsel appearing^{for the 7th defendant reportedthat he hasno} objection to^{allowthe OA without prejudiceto the rights of 7th} defendant bank.^{Perused the materialplaced on record'}

¶30

According to the^{applicant bank,sincedefendants 1to 5 and} late Susheel^{Kumar Nidamarthi failed to repay the loans availed} from the applicant^{bank, the present OA is filed to recover its} part of loan dues from^{the defendants} ' unO .r.t3",.rt,- ]o.Il, | :-'' -

¶31

oa.7LOl2024

¶32

severally and from the 6th defendant to the extent of estate of Late Susheel Kumar Nidamarthi lying in his hands.

¶33

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶34

Whether the Appticant Bank is enti ed for the OA claim against the Defendants and the OA schedule assets as prayed for?

¶35

As stated supra, defendants 1 to 5 and 6rh defendant remained exparte despite summons. Defendant No.7 not objected to the OA claim provided its interests are protected. Under such circumstances, the OA claim of the applicant bank coupled with the recitals in Exs.A.1 to A,1S remain unchallenged and unrebutted. Accordingty, I hold that the defendants 1to 5 jointly and severally and defendant No.6 to the extent of estate of deceased Susheel Kumar Nidamarthi lying in his hands, are liable to pay the OA claim to the applicant bank along with future interest and costs.

¶36

In the result, the present Original Application No.110/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶37

i) the defendants 1 to 5 joinuy and severally and 6th defendant to the extent of estate of late Susheel Kumar Nidamarthi now lying in his hands, are liable to pay to the Appticant Bank a total sum of Rs.8,53,18,032.57ps (Rs.94,66,722, 3ops under UGECL Account and Rs.7,58,51, 970,27ps under Cash Credit Account) along with interq.st @9.5olo p.a.

¶38

oA.tLo12024

¶39

simple from the date^{of applicationtill the} date of realization;

¶40

ii) the OA claim^{is secured by way of mortgage} of OA schedule^{properties and the applicant} bank is entitled^{to proceed againstthe same} subject to the rights^{of 7th defendantunder} consortium arrangement^{for recoveryof its} debt;

¶41

iii) applicant bank is also^{entitled to proceed} against the^person and^propertiesof defendants 1 to 5^{for realizationof its dues;} and

¶42

iv) the applicant bank^{is entitledfor the costs.}

¶43

The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of^{receipt of this Order.}

¶44

L2. Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly.}

¶45

l3.Communicateacopyofthisordertothepartiesconcernedand upload in Web Portal'

¶46

(Dictatedtothesteno,signedandpronouncedbymeintheopencourtonthis the26th day of December,²⁰²⁴⁾ /ftrur1-,..qr\ / ///ryv1{desnwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S.Lampex Electronics Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S.Lampex Electronics Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Authentic Travels

Hdfc Bank Limited versus the Ishwar Mining and Industrial Corporation Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Sh Mohanlal Tomar

Ms GuruKripa Rice Mill and Others versus Punjab National Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shristi Mini Rice Mill

Bank of India versus Mrs Madhu Kumari