Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Kisan Enterprises

DRT29 Oct 2024OA/154/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Applicant Bank's Original Application for recovery of a loan. The Tribunal found the bank established its claim after the defendants remained absent. The bank was ordered to recover the principal, interest, and proceed against hypothecated/mortgaged properties and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability to pay the recovered sum with interest; right to proceed against hypothecated/mortgaged properties and personal properties of partners; grant of costs.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Kisan Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I^{AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 29H DAY OF OCTOBER'²⁰²⁴

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND,^{PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶3

OA.No.154 ol 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, Hyderabad Main Branch, Siddiamber bazar, Post box No.11078, Hyderabad, Telanga na State. Represented by its Principal Officer and Chief manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Kisan Enterprises, Plot no. 185/1, Prashashan Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500 033.

¶9

Mr. B. Baby Divya Sai, D/o Srinivasa Rao, aged about 30 years, female, occ: business, R/o 57/A, SV Shelters, flat No.203, Road no.12, MLA colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 34.

¶10

Mr. B. Srinivasa Rao, s/o Late Veeraiah, aged about 60 years, male,

¶11

occ: business,

¶12

R/o 57/A, SV Shelters, flat No.203, Road no.12, MLA colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 34.

¶13

Mrs. M. Sunitha, w/o M. Kishore Verma, aged about 42 years, female,

¶14

occ: business, H.no. 1-10-50/1,

¶15

(oA. No.1sal2024)

¶16

street no.2, Ashok nagar, Hyderabad - 500 020.

¶17

Defendants

¶18

Counsel for the^parties:

¶19

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶20

Sri N. Subba Raju Exparte

¶21

ORDER

¶22

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.7g,32,g77.60ps (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Seven and paise Sixty only) with further interest @ 10.g5o/o p.awith monthly rests from 01.03.2024 tiil the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated movabres and mortgaged property as described in the schedule^,.A & 8,, to OA.

¶23

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a partnership firm represented by defendant No.4 and defendants No.2 & 3 as its partners avaired working capitar of Rs.35.00 lakhs and subsequentry it was enhanced/ renewed to Rs.1,50,00,000/- on 05.05.2018. The defendants hypothecated goods and book debts in favou.r of*Apq[icant bank and created mortsage by deposit of tiue d""ds o{;i&" .L954/2ott dated ribed in the schedule to OA. Afteq a:.,airirfo ITSIJffi r".,rt the defendants

¶24

(oA. No.1s4l2024)

¶25

failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued recall notice dated 02.02.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding, Hence this OA.

¶26

Defendants No.1 to 4 called absent and set exparte on 17.10.2024.

¶27

Sri B. SumitKumar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex,A.1 to A.6.

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶29

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?

¶30

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.6. 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. the OA with future interest

¶31

and costs.

¶32

(oA. No.1s4l2024)

¶33

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶34

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.7g,glg77.6ops (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Seven and paise Sixty only) with further interest @ 10.85o/o p.a from 01.03.2024ti11 the date of realization;

¶35

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the

¶36

hypothecatedand mortgaged properties AS described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶37

10' 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 entitled 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

Communi lcopy^{of the order to the parties concerned.}

¶42

by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open
r6 2024)
&
* sd/-
{
2 g ocr 2mt (G. GOPTCHAND)
I PRESIDiNG OFFICER
,TRUECOPYN.
Llt 9,K =7
o ^ --.1d\o'
Asstfrcgtrtai
DDT-I Hy^Eo a.r 10.

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Kisan Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Kisan Enterprises

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

Narsing Rao Mekala versus Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.

Bank of India versus M/S. Bahujan Rythu Mitra Sangam

Idbi Bank Limited versus M/s. Sri Rama Plastics

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sri Muluguri Anandam

Smt.Rachamalla Satyamma versus Centrum Housing Finance Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Mandla Srinu