Allowed

Idfc First Bank Limited v. Snycosmos Construction Private Limited

DRT9 Dec 2024OA/198/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by IDFC First Bank for recovery of dues from the defendants based on the prima facie evidence presented. Directions were issued for payment of principal, interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability to pay Rs. 29,28,490/- with interest; lien on hypothecated vehicle; costs awarded; recovery certificate issued.

Idfc First Bank Limited versus Snycosmos Construction… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE ogTh c ot DE.EMBER' 2024 'RESENT:^{sH. RAMESHWAR*o]ot} ,*urrorrlro.irur...r?., L. LB. ( Hons. ), M.A.

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 198 OF 2023

¶3

IDFC First Bank Limited ,,Now,, tsartier l4ls.Capital First Limited. uo^or No.6_3_354 , 2"d Ftoor, :-"-=1"*:l:,^{Near Nagarjuna Circte,} t,anJara Hilla Road No.1, Hyderabad_SOOO34. Rep. by its Authorized Repiesentative.

¶4

.....Appticant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

SNY Cosmos Constructions Private Limited., Rep by N. Sreenivasulu,

¶7

S/o. Ranga iah Nutheti, Aged_.about 46^years, Occ: Business, R/o.Flat No.301, classic Avenue, B/s to RS Brothers Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500016.

¶8

N. Sreenivasulu, S/o. Rangaiah Nutheti, Aged about 46^years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No.301, Classic Avenue, B/s to RS Brothers Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500016.

¶9

.. . Defenda nts

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant

:M/s.V.Santosh

Defendants

:Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.29,28 ,490/- as on 75.07.2022 frcm the defendants Stl

¶16

oA.NO.198/2023

¶17

join.y and^severa*y .with -rut'J,ffi::::"t;i':^j^:",}'tJ, monthly^{rests from the date or apptt'o"I.-.,.} ^.^."t.o, realization^{along with costs and in default for sale (} hyPothecated^vehicle'

¶18

paper Publication^TheY

¶19

1. Summons^{served on D1 and 2 through} called^{absentand no} were^{set ex-Parte on 24 'fl'2123as} representation'

¶20

The Applicant^{Bank examined Akshay Kulkarni'Legal Manager'} as AW-1^{and marked09 documents through him as Ex' A'1 to} Ex. A.09.

¶21

Ld. counsel^{for the ApPlicantBank reported ordersmay be} passed through^{merits Perused the material placed on record'}

¶22

The^point that^{arises for considerationis:-}

¶23

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hYpothecated} vehicle?

¶24

As stated^{supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1 to^{A.09 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants'} Hence, I hold^{that the Defendants are jointlyand severallyliable} to^pay the OA^{claimto the Applicant Bank with futureinterest} and costs.

¶25

In the result,^{the present Original ApplicatioLNo19812023is} allowed as under:^- 6ffir*'l

¶26

6ffir*'l

¶27

oA.NO,198/2023

¶28

The Defendants are^{jointly and severally}

¶29

i) liable to^pay to^{the Applicant Bank a sum of} Rs.2g,28,4gO/-^{as on 15.07.2022with future} interest @11.50o/o^{p.a. simplefromthe date} of application^{till the date of realization;}

¶30

ii) the OA claim^{issecured bY waY of} hypothecatlon^{of vehicledescribed in the} schedule annexed^{tothe OA and the} applicant^{bank is entitledto proceed against} the same to^{realise its debt;}

¶31

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

¶32

iv) the applicant^{bank is entltledfor the costs'}

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly.}

¶35

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno, corrected,^{si8nedand pronounced by me in the open courton} this the og'h Day of^{December, 2024)}

¶36

".J!fi

¶37

HWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Idfc First Bank Limited v. Snycosmos Construction Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idfc First Bank Limited v. Snycosmos Construction Private 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

State Bank of India versus Rajendranath

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S. Shyam Enterprise

Shri Punabhai Samatbhai Bharwad versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Sri Debabrata Shome And Anr.

Bangiya Gramin Vikas Bank versus Sri Nirjhar Kumar Sarkar Prop of Niyati Auto Mobiles and Ors.

M/S Manik Commercial Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. versus Union Bank Of India