Allowed

Central Bank of India v. M/S. Cold Care Agritech

DRT13 Nov 2024OA/155/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Originating Application filed by Central Bank of India against multiple defendants, directing the payment of outstanding dues under cash credit, term loans, and fit loans with interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 1,57,47,461.02 plus future interest on cash credit, WCTL, and FITL MSME loans. Recovery certificate issued.

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Agritech — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER'2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.155 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Central Bank of India, Hyderabad Main branch. Bank street, Koti, Hyderabad - 500 001. Represented by its Constituted Attorney

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Cold Care Agritech, A registered partnership firm Represented by its Managing partner Office situated at B-345, 2nd floor, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad - 70.

¶9

Mr. PochampallySrinivasa Rao, S/o PochampallySudhakar Rao, Plot no.13, HIG Hill Colony, Near ganesh temple, Vanasthalipuram, Hayatnagar, RR district, Hyderabad - 70.

¶10

3, Mr. P. Upender Rao, s/o Sri P. Sudhakar Rao, aged about 55 years, occ: business, Plot no.13, HIG Hill Colony, Near ganesh temple, Vanasthalipuram, Hayatnagar, RR district, Hyderabad - 70.

¶11

Mr. PochampallyJanardhan Rao, S/o PochampallySudhakar Rao, Plot no.13, HIG Hill Colony, Near ganesh temple, Vanasthalipuram, Hayatnagar, RR district, Hyderabad - 70.

¶12

a
{s
* *
1i ;;
r1 1fi7t :.
Q&;i'e

¶13

(oA.1ss of 2024)

¶14

Smt P. Soujanya, w/o Sri Srinivas Rao, aged 40 years, occ: business, Plot no.13, HIG Hill Colony, Near ganesh temple, Vanasthalipuram, Hayatnagar, RR district, Hyderabad - 70.

¶15

Smt P. Laxmi, w/o Sri P. Upender Rao, aged about 50 years, occ: business, Plot no.13, HIG Hill Colony, Near ganesh temple, Vanasthalipuram, Hayatnagar, RR district, Hyderabad - 70.

¶16

Sri Ch. LaxmiNarasimha, s/o Sri Ch. Chidambar Rao, aged about 52 years, occ: business, H.No.12-22, road no.1, Plot no.99, SriramaKrishnapuram, Kothapet, Hyderabad.

¶17

B. Smt P. Gayatri Rao, w/o P. Sudhakar Rao, aged about 75 years, occ: business, Plot no.13, HIG Hill Colony, Near ganesh temple, Vanasthalipuram, Hayatnagar, RR district, Hyderabad - 70. Defenda nts

¶18

Counsel for the Pa
tul-a
For the Applican Sri K.V. Nageswara Rao
For the Defend
x pa rte
1 3 }lnx fot
1. The Applicant present OA against Defendants for
recovery of a total sum of Rs.L,57,47,461.O2ps (Rupees One

¶19

(OA.155 of 2024)

¶20

Crore Fifty Seven Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Sixty one and paise Two only) i.e.,

¶21

a) A sum of Rs.1,37,84,272.L0ps under cash credit withfurther interest @ 11.5% p.awith monthly rests & 2yo p.aover due interest & 2olo penal interest from date of filing of oA till the date of realisation;

¶22

b) A sum of Rs.18,20,251.45ps under WCTL term loan with further interest @ 10.30o/o p.awith monthly rests & 2yop.aover due interest and 2o/o penal interest from date of filing of OA till the date of realisation;

¶23

c) A sum of Rs.1,42,937.47ps under FITL MSME withfurther interest @ 12.7Oo/o p.awith monthly rests & 2o/op.d ovet due interest and 2o/o penal interestfrom date of filing of OA till the date of rea lisation ;

¶24

and in default for sale of hypothecated movables and mortgaged properties as described in the schedule to OA.

¶25

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.l is a firm and defendants 2 to Bare partners availed cash credit limit of Rs.1.50 crores for setting up a cold care Agritech business. The defendant no.1 executed composite hypothecation deed ..,"26{TrfrNrr of Appticant bank in the schedule A

¶26

and hypothecated the .r(S;"r&, ,;3t pital term loan of

¶27

to OA. The defendq'nr no.l Tijffimprtind tr.

¶28

W,t*,#

¶29

(oA.1ss of 2024)

¶30

Rs.25,33,000/- and executed Debtor-creditor agreement and also availed FITL for a sum of Rs.5,79,000/- dated 31.03.2021. Defendants No. 2 to B jointly executed form of guarantee dated 21.04.2021 in favour of Applicant Bank. Defendants 2,3,4 and 7 deposited the title deeds of schedule B and C properties on 30.01.2018. 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 and issued demand notices.Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶31

Defendants No. 1 to B called absent and set exparte on 06.08.2024.

¶32

Sri B. Raghuveer, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.36.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶34

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled prayed for?for the claim made in the'^r"-\inst the Defendants as

¶35

prayed

¶36

Defendants remained erpjlqg rt^{3r,iUUtiRtut"} 1 e case of the i i. *,

¶37

Applicant Bank, AW.1. "'''*(Ql,iitW was examined

¶38

¶39

(oA.1ss of 202a)

¶40

and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to 4.36. In view of the above, I hold that the Appricant 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.

¶41

In the result, the present OA is allowed wlth costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.L,57,47,461.O2ps (Rupees One Crore Fifty Seven Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Sixty one and paise Two only) i.e.,

¶42

a) A sum of Rs.1,37,84,272.10ps under cash credit with further interest @ 11.5olo p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realisation;

¶43

b) A sum of Rs.18,20,251.45ps under WCTL term loan with further interest @ 10.30o/o p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realisation;

¶44

c) A sum of Rs.1,42,937.47ps under FITL MSME with further interest @ L2.7Oo/o p.afrom date of filing of OA till the date of realisation;

¶45

¶46

eed against the as described in hypothecatedassets and/( mo4glqs/ ?m0pe !,ii { ';\zxvo6..r$ "..-'\lfa\y

¶47

(OA.1ss of 2024)

¶48

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 8 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶49

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

¶50

t2. The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶51

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶52

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶53

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day of Nov, 2024)

¶54

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND)

¶55

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

z;*&
'rr.]n E
'. 1 3 ll0l/ ,n2t *,,
-1 -_ .:
' ( -s.'-; i
\g3;,*tV:'

¶57

TRUE 9OPY.
vt. a 7:1#

¶58

DRT*1, HYDE|I.O.BAD.

Central Bank of India v. M/S. Cold Care Agritech

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. M/S. Cold Care Agritech

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Vasthav Vermi Products

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Srinivasa Traders

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Roja Pvc Implements

Kosetty Krishna versus Bank of Baroda

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Vema Subha Rani

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Warehousing and Logistics