Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Narsimha Poultry Farm and Feed

DRT11 Dec 2024OA/129/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by the bank for recovery of a term loan and additional term loan. The court held the bank established its claim and directed the defendants to pay the principal sum, reduced interest rates, and costs. A recovery certificate was issued to proceed against mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs.49,55,630/- with reduced interest rates (11.20% and 9.95%) and costs; recovery certificate issued to proceed against mortgaged properties.

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Narsimha Poultry… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER'2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA,No.129 of 2lJ24

¶4

Between:

¶5

Ind ia n Overseas bank, Hanamkonda branch, D.No.2-5-614, D-Mart Side lane Subedari, Hanumakonda, Telangana State - 506 001. Represented by its Branch Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Narsimha Poultry Farm And Feed, Represented by Sri Ramulu, H.No. 1- 192, Gavicharla, Sangammandal, Warangal District, TS - 506 310.

¶9

Sri RavulaNarsaiah, s/o Sri Ramulu, aged major, occ: business, R/o H.No.1-192, Gavicharla, Sangammandal, Warangal district, TS - 506 310.

¶10

SmtRavulaSugunamma, w/o Sri RavulaNarsaiha, aged 58 years, occ: business, R/o H.no. 1-192, Gavicharla, Sangammandal, Warangal District, TS - 506 310.

¶11

Sri Ravula Ramakrishna, S/o Sri RavulaNarsaiah, Aged 43 years, occ: business, r/o H.No. 1-192, Gavicharla, Sangammandal, Warangal District, TS - 506 310.

¶12

ffi<br>; lloEcmr ;
W,##

¶13

(oA. No.129l2024)

¶14

Sri linukalaSammaiah, S/o Sri Mallaiah, aged 68 years, Occ: business, R/o H.No.5-38, Ramavaram village, Narsampet Mandal, Warangal Rural dist- 506 33 1 . ....

¶15

Defendants

¶16

Counsel for the Pa rties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Sri M. Srinivas

Dr. K. Sai Prasad

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.49,55,630/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand Six hundred and Thirty onty) i.e.,

¶23

a) A sum of Rs.47,58,802/-with interest @ 13.20olo p.a (including penal interest @ 2o/o p.a) from date of application till the date of realization;

¶24

b)A sum of Rs.1,96,828/- with interest @ 11.95olo p.a (including penal interest @ 2o/o p.a) from date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

and in default for sale of mortgaged properties as described in the schedule "A to C" to OA.

¶26

As per the averments in the appli Bank states ,fu., reffient efe.nda nts No.2 as proprietor avaited term:lqan flcflidEhlfif, su m^* Rs.30.00 lakhs on 16.07.2014. O"f"naunM[ rantors to

¶27

(oA. No.129l2024)

¶28

the loan availed by defendant noo.2 and executed guarantee agreement. Defendants 2,3 and 5 also executed regd memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 23.07.20L4 in favour of Applicant bank by depositing the title deeds in respect of immovable propertiesmore fully described in the schedule to OA. On 06.06.2016, the defendants availed additional term loan of Rs.3.00 lakhs and executed demand promissory note in favour of Applicant bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 02.05.2022 and issued legal notice dated 15.05.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶29

Dr.K. Sai Prasad, counsel for defendants filed vakalath but failed to File Written statement.

¶30

Sri A. Sai KumarNaik, Asst. Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.18.

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsett"/9,€*Btss\ ,.'"n- '-('$^{-q</sup> 6. The point that arise f6r fonsideration is whetFie the Applicant Bank is 111ECmr )r entitled for the ctaim made in tii' 3(r ug+ the Defendants as -,. ,.i ,. '^! 'it^-'. ..:)^{',.. ',} , prayed for? \i...,^,," . ,.,^,q6o). - \ t i"''t-'..-r1\ .4. -.1.: 1,: :. \1: i;.-}

¶32

(oA. No.1291202a)

¶33

Counsel for defendants filed vakalath but failed to file WS. 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. 18. 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.

¶34

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.49,55,630/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand Six hundred and Thirty only) i.e.,

¶35

a) A sum of Rs.47,58,802/-with interest @ 11.20olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶36

b) A sum of Rs.1,96,828/- with interest @ 9.95olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶37

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties as described in schedule "A to C" to OA towards ,aq*

¶38

reatization of the debt due. fi'f AeYwdg 1

¶39

The Appllcant Bank is alsg &ntitled to-proceed4jfiinst the person and properties or oerenoaiiri*",J,1^{gtC"ffifrr"oiil",} or derendant no. 1 firm towards .".,,.",,;$f;{lffi}y

¶40

(OA. No.129/2024)

¶41

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶42

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date

¶43

of receipt of order.

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶46

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 11th day of Dec, 2024)

¶47

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶48

ffi
/:,f -B
io 11DECryt
ii iir-?
tir.l},'.1.
-oo.S,
.,,..,.h r r"D3i{ ii: {'
\taxri.ji},

¶49

(l,s*76rRuE"COPy-l,
Dp-t-t, xvoERAg 2.i)

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Narsimha Poultry Farm and Feed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Narsimha Poultry Farm and Feed

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

The South Indian Bank Ltd. versus Mr. J. Gopal Rao

Union Bank of India versus Mr. G. Srinivasa Sarma

K Padma versus Iifl Home Finance

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Mallu Ramchandra Reddy

Indian Overseas Bank versus Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (Pacs)

State Bank of India versus M/S. Om Sree Venkatanameswara Prelam Private Limited