Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S. Svls Enterprises

DRT9 Jan 2024OA/205/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of ₹3.01 crores along with interest and penal charges from the defaulting respondents, holding that the bank established its claim through evidence.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.30,15,106.30 plus interest; Applicant entitled to proceed against hypothecated movables and properties of defendants.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrs rHE 9tH DAy oF JANUARv, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.2O5 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Bank of India, Dilsukhnagar branch, t6-lL-740/7, Near Chandana brothers, Main road, Dilsukhnagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad, Telangana State - 500 060. Represented by its Constitute Attorney Sri T. Jagannadham

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. SVLS Enterprises,

¶9

A registered partnership firm Represented by its partners SmtJakkidiSwarnaLatha and

¶10

SmtKollu Purnima at Kris Gethin

¶11

Gyms, 11-9-5, 4th floor, Above krithunga Restaurant, SBI colony, kothapet, Hyderabad - 500 035.

¶12

SmtJakkidiSwarnaLatha,

¶13

w/o P. Satish Reddy, aged 43 years, occ: business, r/o H.No.5-7-t34, plot no.445, B.N. Reddy colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad - 79.

¶14

ftEft
Q'.-+\ - tt'
h,

¶15

SmtKollu Purnima,

¶16

w/o M. Srikanth, aged 48 years, occ: business, R/o H.No.10-251, New Gayathrinagar, Jillelag uda Village, Sa roornaga r, Hyderabad - 500 097.

¶17

(OA.No.205 of 2023)

¶18

Counsel for the Parties:

¶19

For the Applicant

¶20

For the Defendants

¶21

Sri D. Brahma Reddy Exparte

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.3O,15,1O6.3Ops (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Fifteen thousand One hundred Six and paise thirty only) with interest @ 13.25olo p.a with monthly rests plus 2o/o penal interest from the date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶24

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a registered partnership firm no.r26L/20L6 represented by its partners/ defendants 2 and 3 who availed term loan of Rs.90.00 rakhs and crean over draft of Rs.5.00 rakhs for setting up fitness centre/ gym vide sanction letter dated 17.06.2016. The defendants executed demand promissory note, bearer retter, installment letter, IFD-x- hypothecation cum agreement dated 18.06.2016. The defe owledgement of debt and security letters d 02.2027 confirming its liability. After a iliig tfte9 loart fffiitief e defendants failed to .: t comply the term '.of.. sanction, applicant bank was '"qPS

¶25

(OA.N0.205 of 2023)

¶26

constrained to classify the account as NpA on 01.05.2021 and issued legal notice dated 23.09.2021. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶27

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 13.11.2023.

¶28

Shri J. Madhu Mohan Lal,Officer of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A. 18.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶30

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?

¶31

Defendants called absent and set 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.19. In view of the above, I hol the Applicant Bank has established their claim made i Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank im made in the OA with future interest

¶32

(OA.No.205 of 2023)

¶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,3O,15,106.30ps (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Fifteen thousand One hundred Six and paisethirty only) with

¶35

interest @ 13.25olo p.a from the date of application till realization,

¶36

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated mova bles as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶37

the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 & 3 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

te a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶42

x\ transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open
rtqf,$nis of )an'2o24)
i'/
cs sdl-
* TRUE
(G. GOPTCHAND)
at.s.{*rfi@ PRESIDING OFFICER
/,E s.!i..
oar-t.xvoUiiiho-
4

Bank of India v. M/S. Svls Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S. Svls 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S. Madhu Infra

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sindhu Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri Varakantham Nanda Kumar Reddy

State Bank of India versus M/S. Surex Engineering Works

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Narashimha Binny Rice Mill

Bank of India versus M/S. Prius Enterprises Private Limited