Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri Mohammed Abdul Hateem

DRT23 Aug 2024OA/213/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 83,49,985/- from two defendants absconding the summons. The court held the defendants jointly liable, ordered recovery from the hypothecated vehicle and other properties, and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 83,49,985/- plus future interest. Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendant properties. Recovery Certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri Mohammed Abdul Hateem — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SH, RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B,Com., L.LB.^(Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 213 OF 2023

¶5

ICICI BANK LI IVIITED ICICI Bank Tower, Plot No,12, Na na kra mg uda, Serilinga mpa lly, Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500032.

¶6

Rep. by its Power of Attorney.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

Srl Mohammed Abdul Hateem, S/o. Mohammed Abdul Muneem, Aged about 45 Years, Occ: Business, R/o.16- 10- 128/3/8, SVPNPA, Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500052.

¶10

Sri.lvlohammed Waseem Abd ul, S/o. lvlahammed Abdul Muneem, Aged about 44 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. H. No.5-8-323/ 1/105, Nampally Near Station Road, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500007. ... DefendantsDefendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s.R.Rajendra Prasad Defendants : Ex-pa rte

¶12

... DefendantsDefendants

¶13

::^q-LD-LB ::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.83,49,985/- as on 14.70.2022 under Loan $oerr

¶15

oA.NO.213/2023

¶16

A/c. No. LAHYDoOO41313489^{from the defendantsjointly and} severally with future^{interest(0 24o/o p.a. with monthlyrests} from the date of application^{till the date of realizationalong} with costs and in default^{for saleof hypothecated vehicle.}

¶17

Summons served^on D1 and 2 through^{paper publication.They} were set ex-pa rte on 09.10.2023 as called absent^{and no} representation.

¶18

The Applica nt Bank examined N.Chandrasekar, Debit Service Manager, as AW-1 and^marked 12 documents through^himas Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.12.

¶19

Ld. Counsel for the^Applicant Bank reported orders may^be passed through merits. Perused the material^placed on^record,

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants^{remained ex-parte. The} Evldence Affidavit coupled with the^{recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1 to A.12 marked on^behalf of^{the ApplicantBank} clinches the claim of the Applicant^{Bank against the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the Defendants^{are jointlyand severally liable} to^pay the OA claim to the^{Applicant Bank with futureinterest} and costs.

¶23

In the result, the^present original^{Application No.213/2023is} allowed as under: - 7fr'.ottu

¶24

oA.NO.213l2023

¶25

¶26

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.83,49,985/- as on 14.10.2022 with future interest @ 9.85% p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same to realise its debu

¶28

iir) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶30

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 23'd Day ofAugust,2O24).

¶33

/ /<sup>\Yttr -,/-,^w /^{y'/.-..'.o.)LL" -} (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri Mohammed Abdul Hateem

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri Mohammed Abdul Hateem

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Nandalal Kesar Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Sunitkumar

Icici Bank Limited versus Suneha Haridas Gadpande

Mr Chandubhai Maganbhai Parmar versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S Gaurav Traders

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S City Rugs India